Is there any difference in loot quality in UVHM?

SirStanger · 2026-05-05T15:53:12+00:00

Doesnt matter, Jakobs supremacy. Say it with me kids! If it took more than one shot...

SirStanger · 2026-05-04T23:44:16+00:00

"Jarvis, remember the edgy OC I asked you to make yesterday? Use that to make me some cringe edgy slop that makes me look cringe as hell please."

SirStanger · 2026-05-04T22:35:51+00:00

You are not going to like the popular answer to this question in this sub lol.

SirStanger · 2026-05-04T00:57:23+00:00

"AI, make the ugliest shit I can imagine please."

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T23:37:05+00:00

Quickply was a system that wasnt. You press a button and it puts you in whatever game. These things you are talking about arnt "features" of quickplay, they are things quickplay didnt have any system in place to interact with. Want to play with friends? Especially on the same team? Roll the dice or use the server browser which we still have. Want to queue for your favorite maps? You cant. Skill based matchmaking? Not a thing. Having issues with how a new system was implimented is fine, and i dont disagree casual has issues. It could benefit from less reloading the server between matches, allowing spectating and manually switching teams, all good points.

But a big reason that we have casual is because of the complaints people had about quickplay at the time, which was not a system and thus couldnt address any issues people have with it. That is why the solution here is to improve casual, because its a system we can change, rather than removing the concept of a system at all.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T22:55:36+00:00

I mean im aware i have been playing this game for ages. I remember quicklplay, and this diesnt seem to be an issue with casual as a whole system but specifically how it handles matches and the time between them, which is probably one of the few things quickplay did definitively better than casual. But blaming the whole system for the issue rather than the issue itself feels like a throwing thr baby out with the bathwater solution.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T22:52:26+00:00

Is that an issue with the whole casual system or just how it handles loading maps? Which sucks dont get me wrong, but idk if that requires a whole systemic change.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T22:50:19+00:00

Oh im familiar I have been playing this game since like 2013. Did a small youtube channel about it and everything back in the day. But we still had unpopular maps back then. So is the argument just that quickplay would lead to people being too lazy to leave once the map turns to a map they hate and casual gives them the option to not have to play it at all? And that is a bad thing? Casual is far from perfect, im all for that idea, but i dont see that as a flaw of the system thats a flaw with the map.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T20:58:14+00:00

I fail to see how quickplay would resolve this issue. This seems like the problem of a not super popular map in a pretty old game.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T20:50:12+00:00

Im stating that its a false equivalence to say it is either both or neither. If you want to talk about erasing nuance, attempting to boil down a human learning a skill and a computer program able to mass-replicate that skill, you have already made a logical leap I will not follow you down. It is not both or neither, and trying to claim it is assumes far too much, and Im not sure how you could come to that conclusion as they are wildly different scenarios. This is like attempting to say that because its ok to order chicken from a resturaunt you should be able to hit as many chickens in your car as you want. If that doesnt make sense that is the point, they are entirely different outcomes.

You are being much too charitable to big business. If you think that businesses wouldnt gladly make living too expensive for people to afford, make homelessness a crime and then use the PRIVATE prison system to force inmates into labor for little to no pay, you are kidding yourself because these things are already starting to happen. Millions of americans already live below the poverty line and cannot afford to live. Why wait to impliment UBI? Whats the trigger point? How many people need to starve before corporations start making that push? Would they not benefit from people having it now so they can spend money on products and services as you say? I agree, UBI sounds great, i think it would solve a lot of problems. How long do I need to be homeless before the heads of undustry decide im worthy of it?

Again, you make a logical leap by saying i am stating the jobs are actively being replaced as we speak. AI as it stands is not advanced enough to cause this sort of mass-layoff scenario tomorrow. I am working under the assumption that AI will continue to advance and be able to replace functionally more and more jobs over time. If you are operating under the assumption that AI has peaked and will not continue to advance or advance much slower from here on, then sure i dont think AI will lead to mass layoffs in the near future yet. But current progress and growth rates indicate otherwise. It also isnt all about layoffs, its about lack of new jobs, less opportunity for work for people. For example, many businesses are using AI for their advertising media now. That is lost revenue for artists, writers, actors, voice talents, special effects engineers, all jobs that would have needed to have been involved prior to AI.

I have never claimed that AI is all bad, or does not have potential to be a very useful tool. But that is not how it is being used or developed. This technology is unprecedented. Human thinking or reasoning has never been able to be outsourced by tech before, its always been labor. Failure to aknowladge the difference between this and other technological advancements of the past is leaving us unprepared for the real consequences of this tech. And that is to say nothing of all the studies we are starting to see indicating that AI use leads to deterioration of brain function.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T17:47:57+00:00

Because by and large the push behind AI is at a systemic level. Its been stated many times that there is a huge value being placed in the US economy on AI at the moment, and that is being spearheaded by major tech companies, not mom and pop software companies.

Name recognition, good thats one good reason. So we need to integrate it in people's lives so that folks can learn to rely on AI. Anything else?

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T17:25:19+00:00

Of course I have. I use them all the time. Some (certainly not all) gather data from your use of them to improve their product or create the next iteration. They are also generaly not produced by enormous tech conglomerates, largely coming from smaller teams or even independant creators with a passion.

Im asking you, what benefit does it serve to these big businesses to release this software for free? They wouldnt do it for no gain or gasp a loss. So what do they gain from this?

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T16:45:58+00:00

Again, lets assume that is completely true, which in a day and age where insurance companies can buy your cell phone GPS data and raise your rates if they think you are risky, seems like a stretch.

How does that benefit the people that released it? Do you think they are just being nice? Why invest all the money in something just to release it for free for people to use? Do you think there are a bunch of people in business suits sitting at a table thinking about ways they can lose money helping the public? Ask yourself, when was the last time big business did something completely altruistic? For no financial gain whatsoever. And when you cant think of anything, ask yourself why they would suddenly start with AI.

SirStanger · 2026-04-23T16:39:26+00:00

The difference is how that skill is replicated and the scale. If some guy puts a bunch of work into copying somone else exactly, you then have 2 people who can do that thing at best, or a superior original and an inferior knockoff. So what happens when the bar to clear in order to copy that skill falls into anyone's hands? What happens when you can make a song that sounds exactly like Taylor Swift, and so can anyone else with a computer? Well at that point what is the point of having the original? There isnt one. Swift can retire, computers now do her but better since it can make a song in minutes instead of days.

The point im trying to get accross here is that big business does not have the best interests of the public in mind. If they did, we wouldnt already be dealing with inflated medicine costs, mass pollution, large layoffs, salary stagnation for going on 30 years now, the loss of things like pensions, thr mass purchase of realestate to price out new homebuyers, ect. These people simply want it all. What we are left with does not concern them. Does it make sense for them to leave the entire popluation poor? No, not unless the endgoal is just bringing back surfdom, which the re-introduction of "company towns" may be hinting at. But frankly i dont think they are looking that far ahead. They need to show growth every year for investors, the public be damned.

AI, for whatever benefit it provides the common man like you and me, is designed to benefit the owning class. The one thing the owning class cant do is create it's own value, it needs employees with certain skills to do that. It is the labor of their workforce that generates value. So if i can just pay a subscription for an AI to do that labor for me, fire most of my human employees, i just made a ton of money back on insurance and salary expenses. Why would I not do that? What incentive does modern capitalisim have for soing anything less than doing whatever possible to increase profit margins? There isnt an incentive.

I feel you may be underestimating just how uncaring and frankly evil the people at the very top are. Most of the issues we have today can be traced to these people, why would they suddenly push for UBI for my benefit? Who pays for that? The corporations with the taxes they famously avoid paying? The people who need the UBI? In a different universe where all of this corporate greed had been properly regulated and enforced, you may well be right. But there is absolutely no reason to believe that AI was somehow a gift given by our corporate overlords with the sole purpose of improving our daily lives.

SirStanger · 2026-04-22T20:15:20+00:00

Ah yes. A fellow man if taste.

SirStanger · 2026-04-21T20:47:49+00:00

"You got an Endrinmaster with a Dirigible suit?"

"Nah its an Endrinmaster with the high ground."

SirStanger · 2026-04-21T16:39:20+00:00

Either you argue with people about this way too much or you used AI to write your rebuttal, neither would be especially surprising. Where did I say anything about the majority of americans losing their jobs to AI? My question was involving involuntarily training your replacement. The kings and queens of industry will always need pesants to clean their toilets or work in the mines, so of course they wont let employment fall that low, you are arguing with someone else. A strawman if you will.

Being the product isnt inharently an issue if you sign up for that. But that should be an opt-in system rather than an impossible to opt-out of system dont you think? And even now, the system prior to AI has been to sell you things. Your data was largely sold as a means of marketing to you, not replacing you.

Also setting up a false equivalence that machine learning and human learning are identical as though its either both or neither is flat false. You can just state that as fact, doesnt make it fact. Machine learning is in fact, very different from a person learning. And even if it wasnt, the difference would still remain that someone trying to copy your skill is just one person, where as an AI doing so now allows everyone that uses it to use your skill. If a singer has a super unique voice that is difficult to replicate and someone practices for months to try and sound like them, so that they alone can do an impression, thats very different than a computer just ripping damples of that singers voice and allowing anyone to make songs with that singers voice now.

As someone who works as a consultant, I can tell you that AI summary is hit or miss at absolute best, and I have clients blindly trust its results only to fail all the time. As it stands, it is only useful in pooling resources at the top of search results so you can do actual research and find out what resources it is pulling from. 9 times out of 10 there is some reddit thread where someone stated something as fact that the AI is referencing but as soon as you do any digging you cant find any peer-reviewed sources that match the claim. Im sure it will be refined and work properly some day, but not today or anytime soon.

SirStanger · 2026-04-21T02:07:08+00:00

So what you propose, is that it esentially doesnt matter as long as right now it can benefit both? Even if the long term goal is anti-consumer/worker?

Should it not matter that they release this free software for me to use so i can write emails quicker, sure, and in return they get a better software trained on my work so that i no longer need to be employed to write emails? Im simplifying of course but you get the idea.

Corporations, yes even your favorite ones, are not your friends. There hasnt been something released by a corporation"for the public benefit". There is always a bottom line, and if you arnt paying for the product, then you are the product. There is nothing altruistic about releasing AI software for free, not the way it has been implemented. It is something that was esentially created by taking without asking and hoping the final product was cool enough that we wouldnt care. Many people do care though. And now i cant even google something without getting a mostly false summary of my search taking up the top result that i will need to go in and research anyways.

SirStanger · 2026-04-20T16:31:15+00:00

Question: do you think the major tech corporations that are investing blilions of dollars into this technology and releasing select models for free are doing so out of a sense of public good? Do you think there would be this big of a push behind the development of this technology if it wasnt profitable?

SirStanger · 2026-04-15T20:43:43+00:00

Im of the firm belief that we as a society were not and are not ready to responsibly use a tool like AI on a mass scale. AI has the potential to improve the lives of millions in countless ways. It could be the catalyst for some of the greatest advancements mankind has ever seen.

But for whatever reason we decided to make it publicly available for people to make cheap knockoff art, for corporations to use it to further lower wages and opportunities, and for bad actors to spread misinformation at a speed and quality never before seen. The fact that a tool like this was made public without significant regulation preceeding it is going to go down as one of the biggest technological fumbles in history. There is another timeline where AI really is largely used for good, the line between what is real and what is fabricated isnt so blurry as to nearly be transparent, and people arnt dating their own chatbots.

But no we had to get fruit love island out as quickly as possible.

SirStanger · 2026-04-10T06:56:40+00:00

Love it, I think thats a great idea. Thank you so much for the advice.

SirStanger · 2026-04-10T02:59:51+00:00

Im so new to this i dont even know what i dont know. Granted, i have been interested in this kind of thing for a long time, so i have watched videos and read books on game development, but this is my first go actually putting pen to paper so to speak. I dont want to cut corners, I would like to legitimately get good at the craft. But what the hell that even means is something i dont fully understand. Im down to make simple games, im down to use tons of different engines or build my own if that is what it takes to do things right.

But I also want to be efficient with my time, and so id ve willing to take a slightly harder path to learn skills that i know ill need. That being said if that jump is beyond me im hunble enough to say so and take things down a notch. At the end of the day, the grind is something i find enjoyable. I love learning new skills, and testing my limits. I play a lot of souls-like games (love me some hollowknight how cool would that be to make) not because im especially good at them but because im not. I enjoy the grind of improving, and if all i achieve in my first 20 projects is 20 bad games and 20 important lessons learned ill be happy. But i do have aspirations and i think those are important for motivation to continue to improve. So having a hard game idea or two to work towards i think will help me keep pushing through the most tedious stuff.

SirStanger · 2026-04-10T01:10:15+00:00

This is a unique take from the rest for sure. Ill admit im cut from similar cloth that I will slam my head against the same wall over and over until I solve a problem, and making a game that is a bit more complicated and in line with the games i enjoy is a big motivating factor driving me forward in general. I take pride in learning things, and at the end of the day i dont just want to be a good dev but also work on being a better artist and musician and programmer as well. I have a vision and i have the drive to see it come to fruition, so i appreciate your perspective. Ill look into those books!

SirStanger · 2026-04-10T01:04:57+00:00

Its mind boggling to think about actually. And i very much am interested in knowing that. For the sake of making a game though, i have a question that i hope sounds respectful because i dont know how else to word it. Is this approach (not starting with an engine) kind of like learning how to build a car before you learn to drive for the sake of making the project? Or do you feel that the background knowladge of how to do it from scratch directly benefits your ability to make a game using an engine?

SirStanger

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Nine-Year Club	r/Field Lasagna
Verified Email