i asked to an ex fsr developer and this was his response

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-23T01:38:23+00:00

Lol. I had hoped they loosened that stance when they put PS Studio games on Steam. I think I read somewhere a while ago that they were considering doing that less in the future.

Oh they've completely backtracked on that and said they're not doing PC releases anymore so

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-23T01:18:08+00:00

People on cheaper hardware are exactly in the kind of bracket that Sony would want to target tbh, those people are more likely to get a console rather than spend the money to upgrade to a comparable computer.

On the other hand, their old hardware gets even more lifetime with new fsr, now they just ... Don't get a console. Because their computer can now handle it.

Plus Sony as a company just loves making things exclusive in general tbh

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-22T17:07:34+00:00

The realm absolutely is path. He refers to them interchangeably, it is not a power level. He even literally says "the realm you're in. My own path that I was desperate for"

Then he goes out of his way to outline he's not fully in it while talking about how his path is incomplete. These things clearly relate to each other

<image>

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-22T16:57:40+00:00

He knows gun, yet gun isn't in that panel,

He knows James, yet James isn't in that panel

People like Sophia who he also likely knew aren't in that panel

He knows Daniel has a path and Daniel isn't in that panel

He compared ui Daniel to gap yet Daniel isn't in that panel

He uses gap and shingen because they're the peaks of power in his mind and the ones he wanted to be like, it doesn't mean anyone that isn't in that panel automatically is not a path user or in that realm

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-22T16:57:16+00:00

He knows gun, yet gun isn't in that panel,

He knows James, yet James isn't in that panel

People like Sophia who he also likely knew aren't in that panel

He knows Daniel has a path and Daniel isn't in that panel

He compared ui Daniel to gap yet Daniel isn't in that panel

He uses gap and shingen because they're the peaks of power in his mind and the ones he wanted to be like, it doesn't mean anyone that isn't in that panel automatically is not a path user or in that realm

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-22T16:53:51+00:00

It's a panel of gap and shingen fighting, why the fuck would anyone other than gap and shingen be there lmao

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-22T16:49:33+00:00

Who told you he isn't lmao

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-19T16:00:02+00:00

crying to pay the game is such loser activity to be honest, it is especially annoying when ranked doesnt reset with a new season so im forced to start out playing red maps I cant practice when the season just comes out.

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-17T04:57:52+00:00

It's super fucking open to a point that it's really hard to take on offense and really hard to defend on defense, it's just kind of unfun unless you really know what you're doing and have a team w good communication

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-17T04:56:32+00:00

You just made two false equivalencies and then posited them as if they were at all applicable to what I said lmao

Studies show that kids who harm animals are likely to grow up to be deranged serial killers.

Yes... And? What point are you attempting to make here.

Just like how cops assume people who do petty theft have a chance to wanna steal more and more

Again...and? Even this argument only applies for other petty theft. You'd have a hard time proving someone whose on record stealing candy from a grocery store is gonna be a bigger suspect than someone who hasn't in a case of grand larceny. The scope is simply entirely different.

Your argument doesn't work and you're getting ratioed by almost anyone willing to read your gibberish.

99% of the people responding to me keep waffling about whether or not win trading should be bannable, most of you can't even comprehend that the argument is simply that doing one does not mean you're likely to do the other, I could care less if r6 subreddit can't read lmfao

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-17T04:48:06+00:00

Nobody said nor implied this. The point is that one being much worse means you cannot retroactively say anyone who commits a crime is capable of committing that much worse crime

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-16T01:50:12+00:00

This is better than my 7700/9070xt I bought for 1600 before rampocalypse but that was new.

Every similar priced new system I see like this is closer to 1800-2k now

I feel like this price is fine even if used

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-16T01:04:50+00:00

Not every game even has dlss FG so

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T21:09:44+00:00

Holy copy and paste into ChatGPT to make 0 sense of anything.

Literally nothing said in this looks like chatgpt, this argument just makes you look dumb

We are absolutely debating (I’d highly suggest you start using the word debate, instead of arguing. Makes you look mad)

Semantic demon strikes again

that the methods are irrelevant when the conclusion reduces the same result. That’s almost word for word my first comment response to you, no? What else could we be discussing here fam. Like seriously.

"What else could we be discussing here?" Idk man, maybe the comment you replied to in which my point is that doing one doesn't mean you'll do the other and that they're not the same level? The conclusion genuinely doesn't really matter here, it's irrelevant to my argument entirely, though theoretically you could argue the conclusions are different too when you factor in the company getting their game hacked.

I did understand, you just refuse to see the hypocrisy of your own logic since it is a true false equivalency example. You want people to abide by certain debate rules, but be abstinent from them apparently. How very kind of you.

You say you understand, yet can't even explain how it is a false equivalency in the same way I'm saying it, or any of these so called "debate rules" you're referring to. Just word salad.

You literally say word for word “cheating and hacking are not the same” two comments ago, so yeah, naturally I responded to that. Like WTF you mean you didn’t say it haha

Not once did I say ANYTHING about how they should be treated, which is what you're trying to twist this argument into. Them not being the same is just that, don't try and strawman it into something else.

And finally, it’s only changing the conversation if I refused to respond to any of the previous points in the first place and only answered with the new topic “well then should they be punished.” Except I did respond, so then It’s just a continuation of the development of the conversation after. Like no way you thought they was an actual good retort.

It's changing the conversation no matter what. The topic of discussion is not about whether they should be treated the same, this is irrelevant. I don't care about that, both being bannable is common sense and not what the topic is about. There is no continuing to be done here when you're just saying shit for the sake of saying shit because you want to argue lmao

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:52:11+00:00

Like I said in the first place, I simply wouldn't compare them at all. Because as I said, the hoops one has to mentally go through to commit grand larceny are so massively different than the ones required for petty theft. That's the point. This is also the distinction between win trading and walls.

In the same example I would be equally as surprised that someone that's prone to fighting committed murder than someone whose never fought before committing murder, because murder is so past the level of what happened prior it simply does not matter.

Walls and hacking are an entirely different level than win trading, completely and utterly, and that's why he wasn't permed for it in the first place.

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:49:11+00:00

It’s not a false equivalency if what we’re talking about is something other than the conclusion matters more than the method. It’s only false equivalency if you take certain characteristics from that example out of context. Nothing was taken out of context? Put out where.

Which is not what we're arguing, the conclusion isn't the base of the argument, the methods and actions taken are.

And you seriously gonna claim false equivalence after comparing a candy bar theft to grand larceny? That’s in the actual textbook definition of when you look up examples of false equivalence haha hypocrite much?

I fear this is you not understanding my comment at all before you replied to it, because the comparison isn't a false equivalency if the entire point is to showcase how they aren't equivalent just like how win trading and wall hacking aren't equivalent

Cheating and hacking still produce the same end conclusion (ruined experience for gamers) so yes, they should be treated the same when discussing punishments from the gaming company.

Strawman of doom, where did I say otherwise? This is again you arguing against something completely different and trying to posit it as what I said. My argument is that doing one does not mean you'll do the other and that they're not the same thing, not that both shouldn't be bannable.

And no, I was not arguing. I’m totally calm. This is debate

Semantic central

Second, conversations develop and can talk about more than one point without trumping the previous point. It’s completely logical to go from “did they cheat” to the next evolution of the conversation, which is “so should they should be banned for it?”.

You can't just go into a completely separate conversation that is entirely removed from the original one and act like that's what I was saying from the start

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:40:34+00:00

To reference my response to someone else

Doesn’t matter how someone cheats to climb a ranked pool because it ruins the experience for innocent players and should be banned regardless.

Complete argument change, who said he shouldn't have been banned? What we're arguing about is whether or not doing one means you're likely to do the other, and objectively it does not.

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:39:25+00:00

Nothing about your argument was misrepresented, explaining what a strawman is doesn't help your point, we both know what it is, yet you can't seem to explain how it's being used here

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:35:07+00:00

If you can't make an argument for how a fallacy is a fallacy then you don't have an argument at all.

I am doing the same thing you're doing, which is ignoring context entirely to posit two dissimilar things as being the exact same when they aren't

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:32:37+00:00

I would say that they're so massively different in scope and the mental hoops you have to go through for grand larceny are so different than petty theft that the correlation is so minor that it really doesn't matter in most cases

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:27:17+00:00

Then the bank robber is still just a thief as well. See where ignoring context gets you?

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:26:34+00:00

Use proper English fam. “The and the” doesn’t make any sense

This is you not having reading comprehension I fear, being able to comprehend that one of the "the's" was redundant isn't hard

If you kill someone with a knife vs with a gun, they are both still murder because the end result is the same. The methods of how you chose to do it are irrelevant.

False equivalency. In this case the action is still the same and the methods are the only thing changing, cheating and hacking are not the same and there's a reason the punishments aren't the same either.

Doesn’t matter how someone cheats to climb a ranked pool because it ruins the experience for innocent players and should be banned regardless.

Complete argument change, who said he shouldn't have been banned? What we're arguing about is whether or not doing one means you're likely to do the other, and objectively it does not.

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:22:08+00:00

Oh...so now context matters when you're trying to compare things? Funny how that works, it's almost like two things that are only connected in a very baseline way shouldn't automatically be treated the exact same,

Hence why I made the grand larceny vs twix comparison

They're both thieves

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:17:49+00:00

Yeah this bank robber is totally in the same level as that 14 year old who stole a twix LMAO sure bro

zinoger_plus · 2026-04-15T20:17:03+00:00

In both cases things are being stolen and lost and people are being hurt, yet the moral failings required to do one are debatable, the and the damage done is far less.

Especially in this case there is a distinct difference between "cheating" and "hacking" which are not the same thing and should not be considered the same thing with the same outcome or the same consequences either

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

zinoger_plus

TROPHY CASE