By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
the-pi-guy said:
KLAMarine said:

The first photos Google shows in the ad had poor lighting. As a solution, Google sells some feature called real tone on their Pixel phone rather than tell their target audience that cameras need good lighting to take good pictures.

False.  

Camera technology is complicated. 

How you capture light, a lot of modern cameras even use AI to try getting the image to closer match what the person is actually seeing. 

How these cameras actually automatically focus on the image. 

There's a ton of processing that goes on for digital cameras. If you think it's as simple as "more light was all that was needed", then I don't know what to tell you. 

https://thisisghanchi.com/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-camera-color-science

"Color science is how a particular sensor, or brand of sensor, changes the colors it reproduces. Built into the camera’s sensor, color science is essentially an internal LUT, or Look Up Table.

It would be fair to ask why camera manufacturers would manipulate the colors coming off of the sensor. Why not just let the sensor capture the entire range of colors, giving everything to the photographer or filmmaker so they can manipulate it in post?

Some companies do this. RED cameras were “color neutral” for a long time until moving to a more subjective color space with IPP2. Sony still produces very accurately — some would say sterile — images."

"Why Canon, ARRI, and Panasonic cameras don’t produce “accurate” colors has to do with the physiology of color and the history of cinema. When ARRI designed their digital cinema camera (the Alexa), they weren’t trying to create accurate colors but, rather, colors that closely resembled those captured on 35mm film and chemical emulsion. This meant skin tones (where the yellows and reds shifted closer to orange, thereby flattening the skin, hiding color imperfections, and making skin tones) seemed more consistent."

"A camera’s color science is built into the capture chain of the camera. Some of the elements of color science are corrective, rather than aesthetic, which may be a result of the maker trying to compensate for tints in the IR filter, Optical Low-Pass Filter, or some other part of the image chain. The first Blackmagic Ursa mini cameras shipped with a noticeable magenta tint in the captured footage, but a subsequent firmware update corrected it."

-snip-

I'm sure there is complexity in camera tech. My point is just that one ingredient to a good photograph is good lighting and it's here where Google's manipulation originates in their Pixel ad: the photos they contrast with their beautiful Pixel pictures are ones with bad lighting.

I find the practice deceptive/manipulative.

Pemalite said:
KLAMarine said:

The first photos Google shows in the ad had poor lighting. As a solution, Google sells some feature called real tone on their Pixel phone rather than tell their target audience that cameras need good lighting to take good pictures.

I view this like an insurance salesman selling volcano insurance in an area with no volcano close by. A dishonest salesman will show the horrors of volcano eruptions to their target audience and hide the fact that there is no volcano in the area.

I'm calling Google dishonest in the ad and to top this dishonesty off, they add a fake veneer of social consciousness to their marketing. I find this appeal-to-emotion marketing obnoxious. And while I dislike using the word 'woke', if I had to use it, this ad would qualify as 'woke' in my book.

...Is it truly woke though? They aren't telling you to treat others differently, they aren't even telling you to accept minorities or socially progressive issues...

They are literally just selling a feature for their phones and they needed someone with a dark complexion to showcase that feature... How would you demonstrate that feature? Use a black cat at night? Or a white person? Probably not the same effect.

Depends on your definition of 'woke'. Like I said earlier, I don't like using the word 'woke'. It's a loaded term.

I just find it obnoxious how Google's Pixel ad contrasts photos with poor lighting vs their Pixel photos with excellent lighting and try to sell their phone/features based on that sleight of hand.

the-pi-guy said:

Kind of a side note.

I think it's overly easy in political threads to get arguably off topic. 

If you have a conversation about PlayStation, you might also talk about MS gaming and Nintendo to compare and contrast to Sony, to talk about their approaches to different things. To bolster the conversation about Sony. But it feels like that's a tighter subject matter.

But politics is ridiculously broad. What is a woke game pretty naturally becomes a conversation about what does woke mean; we're almost instantly talking about stuff that has nothing to do with games. A lot of these political threads feel like they've gone over a line to no longer being on topic, but I have no idea where the line should be. 

KLAMarine said:

As for the savior talk, I'm referring to the whole vibe of the commercial: it feels like Google patting themselves on the back for phone camera tech that solves a problem that really just needed better lighting.

Does anyone know what this is? It feels kind of strawman fallacy-y, but it feels different to me. 

Where you exaggerate something to make it seem silly, feels like a strawman fallacy. 

I've seen people act like being called racist is somehow worse than a death threat. And I've seen people act like doing a regular good deed is "savior" like material. There's this weird hyperbole where you act like something is being treated 100x more seriously than anyone in the world is treating it. 

Unless this is literally the first commercial you've ever seen, no one is watching that commercial thinking that Google is patting themselves on the back as some kind of savior. 

There are 5 million commercials that are patting themselves on the back for anything. Nike puts out commercials that make it seem like their shoes make someone an athlete. Plenty of tech companies put out commercials that make it seem like they're making history.

Yes, advertisers try to build themselves/their product up. Some are honest about their product, others deceptive.

I place Google's Pixel ad in the 'deceptive' category.



Around the Network
JRPGfan said:
Runa216 said:

Funny when you think about it. 

If going woke = going broke, then why is it that companies are marketing to the woke crowd? 

I think some of it, is just being scared of the left side (the woke side) that love to toss labels at everyone and name call people.
These big companies don't want to be called racist or transphobic or whatever, so rather than risk that, they pander to them instead.
Look at SBI, the company lead, did a speech where she basically talked about going to HR, and mentioning this risk factor, as a easy way to get your DEI point across if you work at a company (it comes off, as basically threatening, to get consulting jobs).

Part of it is money lending, apparently you get like tax right offs, and have a easier time, borrowing money, if you put in DEI stuff.
Not sure what government funding projects or whatnot this is, but I've heard this mentioned before.

I think another part is just indoctrination.... alot of people are taught this stuff at universities, and come new off the market, thinking like this.
Plus I think, even if LGTBQA+ make up a small part of society,alot of people that get into graphic design and creative fields, are gay or lesbian, compaired to normal people. These people find jobs, in the games industry (someone has to make the graphics ect).  And they believe in this stuff, because alot of them are from that part of the community (or have friends from the field that are, so allies as they call themselves).

I think another part of it, is the people that get a kick out of owning the chuds.
Theres people just cant help come out on twitter saying stuff like "gamers are a mistake" "I want to punch these people" ect ect.
Alot of people, just view it as a job... and care nothing about how well the game sales do.  Their messaging in the game is more important than the profit the company makes.

So this is the why of it... Even if ultimately it might be counter productive to profit margins.

that sure is some olympic level mental gymnastics right there to push a 'the world isn't actually going in the direction it seems' conspiracy theory. 

Honestly, the 20 year old in me wants to rip into every false statement and absurd claim here but the 30+ year old in me is just so tired of the nonsense. I legitimately don't even know why I bother getting into these discussions if THIS is the sort of thing the anti-woke crowd is putting forth as their version of 'well reasoned' arguments. This is why, when I first posted in this thread I was kinda hesitant, because I see all the same bad faith arguments used time and time again, supported by conspiracy and twisted into something absurd because why not? 

As for the overall theme of the thread:

I wrap myself back to one of the stronger points I've made so many times in the past that mostly get ignored: The simple, wrong answer is a lot easier to spread and believe than the complicated, right answer. So many of these are points and opinions and arguments that make some sense if you only see them at a surface level. So many of the points brought up actually might have the slightest basis in reality or facts but completely disregards all the historical context or depth around the topic. Arguing with these points is always so frustrating because a simple false claim that lasts all of a single sentence requires the correct person to offer a whole paragraph or more just explaining why people think the way the wrong person does, why it's oversimplified, what factors led to the conclusion, and why the REAL answer is something else entirely. 

The complicated right answer is so hard to perpetuate because it often requires actual understanding of the topic at hand, so responding with ample context and detail is usually glazed over or ignored. I've seen it happen on this forum EVERY Time a topic like this comes up.

IT's the ben shapiro method of debate. Just sling a dozen loosely linked, false claims that start with something kinda rational and by the time the wrong person is done making their statement, the more correct person has to work back through 20 points just to explain how and why the incorrect statements are in fact wrong. And by that point they've already moved on so they act superior, like...

...fuck it. I'm just so exhausted seeing some people explain in great detail why a thing is the way it is only to have dumb statements and arguments that ignore vital context still sounding 'stronger' because simple is strong to a simple mind. I'm sick of the concept of education or empathy being demonized. I'm sick of simple, incorrect concepts resonating with such a wide audience. 

The solution is education. To explain things. to go into depth about these topics, to understand culture and societal fluctations. To really dig into why things the way they are but it's so clear so few actually care. IT's just easy to blame mexican/black (or any non-white) people or queer people or women than it is to understand the societal factors that led us to where we are. 

The idea that helping people or caring about others is bad or weak has been so ingrained in a certain subset of society and I just don't know if I have it in me to care anymore. These debates just show how heartless, cruel, and ignorant some people are, and how proud they are of those facts because they think it makes them strong. 

The idea that 'woke' is bad is just so blatantly ignorant yet there's an entire industry revolving around glamorizing selfishness and callousness. Like the only way YOU Can be strong and powerful and 'based' is to completely disrespect everyone who isn't you, to demonize everything you don't also agree with, and to poke fun at anyone who actually does have these values or isn't you. IT's such an obvious regression in culture to anyone who's paying attention yet so many are still proud to be ignorant while acting like they're correct. 

IT's so. Fucking. Exhausting.

Just once I'd like to see someone with actual patience slowly and empathetically teach people like you about compassion, kindness, and altruism and have it actually change your mind. Just once I'd like for the 'anti-woke' crowd to self-reflect and realize 'wait, these people aren't actually to blame and I've been duped' or 'well shit, now that I know the history it completely changes my perspective on this topic'. But it never happens. It never fucking happens. Because if logic and reason was what wasn't guiding you to where you are, it won't be what guides you away from it. 

And that goes for everyone in this thread. Not just you. it's just so frustrating seeing people genuinely proud of their resistance to empathy or education. I've literally seen someone say 'I'm impressed with your knowledge on the topic but it won't change my mind'. I should have tapped out and moved on then, since it was such a perfect and pure encapsulation on why this entire topic is dumb as hell, but here I am, nearly midnight when I'm hungry and grumpy just writing way too much shit nobody's going to read even  if it was well-thought-out in advance instead of just a meandering train of thought. 

I'll keep watching this thread to see if anyone can knock some sense into you but I kinda gave up years ago. at this point I just sort of hope the whole world burns if those are the values you and so many others like to valorize. 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

whats everyones thoughts on this?

Principle art designer at Naughty Dog, gifting a drawing of Eve, to the devs at Stellerblade.
They took her and turned her ugly, basically, and the internet is in a uproar over it (basically its "the pattern" repeating).
They question if Naughty Dog can even make a beautiful or sexy woman anymore.
Will there be any beauties in intergalactic?

Supposedly the steller blade devs, didn't link/tag Naughty Dog, when they posted it.
Likely because they knew there would be backlash to the drawing, and didn't want that associated with naughty dog.
(ei. thanks for the gift... it kinda sucks... but I guess we need to post it anyways, and say thanks).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFcbxTZv954

eve from steller blade:

Naughty dogs drawing:

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 29 December 2024

JRPGfan said:

whats everyones thoughts on this?

Principle art designer at Naughty Dog, gifting a drawing of Eve, to the devs at Stellerblade.
They took her and turned her ugly, basically, and the internet is in a uproar over it.
They question if Naughty Dog can even make a beautifull or sexy woman anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFcbxTZv954

More juvenile outrage. Everything looks pretty congruent to the source material but the face which you could chalk up to the change in style. It's not like she even looks ugly in the fan art; just, again, less like a porcelain doll.



TallSilhouette said:
JRPGfan said:

whats everyones thoughts on this?

Principle art designer at Naughty Dog, gifting a drawing of Eve, to the devs at Stellerblade.
They took her and turned her ugly, basically, and the internet is in a uproar over it.
They question if Naughty Dog can even make a beautifull or sexy woman anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFcbxTZv954

More juvenile outrage. Everything looks pretty congruent to the source material but the face which you could chalk up to the change in style. It's not like she even looks ugly in the fan art; just, again, less like a porcelain doll.

Do you still think naughty dog are able to make a sexy character design? Or even just a normal female with femine traits?
Like... what are the chances of there being one, in intergalactic, that like catches on fire, all the internet loves, because shes so hot? or just really endearing because of her femininity?

I put that chance near zero..

Granted, not every game needs beautifull characters...  and it seems the western devs shy away from even trying.
Meanwhile look at what the chinese devs do, and notice how often it seems to pay off.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 29 December 2024

Around the Network
JRPGfan said:

Do you still think naughty dog are able to make a sexy character design? Or even just a normal female with femine traits?
Like... what are the chances of there being one, in intergalactic, that like catches on fire, all the internet loves, because shes so hot? or just really endearing because of her femininity?

I put that chance near zero..

Considering the amount of porn there is for their last game (even Abby), I'd say the answer is emphatically yes. Even in the 'controversial' trailer we have, are you going to tell me that the supporting female on the monitor isn't conventionally attractive?

JRPGfan said:

Granted, not every game needs beautifull characters...  and it seems the western devs shy away from even trying.
Meanwhile look at what the chinese devs do, and notice how often it seems to pay off.

Western devs aren't going out of their way to objectify their female characters any more because that's not the point of those characters or the games they're in. Chinese gacha games are literally designed around selling (more like gambling) sexual objects to their customers. "Hopefully the next pull of the digital slot machine will reward me with the curvy waifu I want!" Hell, obscuring characters' asses in ZZZ was referred to by the community as '9/11 for gooners'. I try not to kinkshame, but I do take issue with people who act like games are bad or female characters have less/no value if they can't fap to them.



JRPGfan said:

whats everyones thoughts on this?

Principle art designer at Naughty Dog, gifting a drawing of Eve, to the devs at Stellerblade.
They took her and turned her ugly, basically, and the internet is in a uproar over it (basically its "the pattern" repeating).
They question if Naughty Dog can even make a beautiful or sexy woman anymore.
Will there be any beauties in intergalactic?

Supposedly the steller blade devs, didn't link/tag Naughty Dog, when they posted it.
Likely because they knew there would be backlash to the drawing, and didn't want that associated with naughty dog.
(ei. thanks for the gift... it kinda sucks... but I guess we need to post it anyways, and say thanks).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFcbxTZv954

eve from steller blade:

Naughty dogs drawing:

That's very much a shift from a 3D model to a drawn model. That is going to do things no matter what you do, let alone cross franchises. 

Hell that can happen in the same franchise, like how much better the human characters from Scarlet and Violet look in their 2D art than the 3D models that work a lot better with the Pokemon than the humans IMO.

TallSilhouette said:
JRPGfan said:

whats everyones thoughts on this?

Principle art designer at Naughty Dog, gifting a drawing of Eve, to the devs at Stellerblade.
They took her and turned her ugly, basically, and the internet is in a uproar over it.
They question if Naughty Dog can even make a beautifull or sexy woman anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFcbxTZv954

More juvenile outrage. Everything looks pretty congruent to the source material but the face which you could chalk up to the change in style. It's not like she even looks ugly in the fan art; just, again, less like a porcelain doll.

Honestly the face really is the only thing that looks 'off' about it. 

TallSilhouette said:
JRPGfan said:

Do you still think naughty dog are able to make a sexy character design? Or even just a normal female with femine traits?
Like... what are the chances of there being one, in intergalactic, that like catches on fire, all the internet loves, because shes so hot? or just really endearing because of her femininity?

I put that chance near zero..

Considering the amount of porn there is for their last game (even Abby), I'd say the answer is emphatically yes. Even in the 'controversial' trailer we have, are you going to tell me that the supporting female on the monitor isn't conventionally attractive?

JRPGfan said:

Granted, not every game needs beautifull characters...  and it seems the western devs shy away from even trying.
Meanwhile look at what the chinese devs do, and notice how often it seems to pay off.

Western devs aren't going out of their way to objectify their female characters any more because that's not the point of those characters or the games they're in. Chinese gacha games are literally designed around selling (more like gambling) sexual objects to their customers. "Hopefully the next pull of the digital slot machine will reward me with the curvy waifu I want!" Hell, obscuring characters' asses in ZZZ was referred to by the community as '9/11 for gooners'. I try not to kinkshame, but I do take issue with people who act like games are bad or female characters have less/no value if they can't fap to them.

You get fanart for two reasons: because you like the character and because you think they are bangable. These often overlap, but not always. But frankly you want the character to be both. 

Also different preferences for different people. There's a reason even Chinese Gatcha game characters don't all have the same bodies. 



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

TallSilhouette said:

Everyone has their own definition and that's kind of the point. It means whatever you want it to, or more specifically whatever you don't like - particularly if that something is culturally or politically even remotely left of a conservative status quo.

I've seen more than one person call out Intergalactic as having an LGBT or DEI 'agenda' and I'd really like to know what exactly that 'agenda' is supposed to be and what exactly they stand to gain from it...

/thread



I legitimately feel like we need to move on from the 'definition' of woke and start asking people, regardless of how they see 'wokeness', why they think it's a bad thing.

Because that's where we start to really peel off the mask and make it abundantly clear how callous and heartless and ignorant these people are.

Even if you think it's a case of 'forced representation ruining the integrity of the medium', I have to ask...how is that a bad thing? Change hurts sometimes. And it's been a boy's club for so long that if we need the artistic value of the medium to be taken seriously we NEED To diversify. We need non-traditional roles. we need to open up games to everyone. Women deserve to have unfiltered representation. Sometimes that means supermodel babes, sometimes that means homely badasses and neither are bad UNLESS you feel entitled to only have YOUR Fantasies fulfilled (As in, either playing as a strong muscly man or being able to gawk at the supermodel ass). If forced inclusion and woke themes are ruining the medium...then it WILL correct itself in time. If people genuinely do stop buying games that have progressive themes, the money hungry corporations will ABSOLUTELY stop making them, or at least find ways to cater to the insecure boys that are complaining.

The problem is a feeling of entitlement. Boys feel entitled to stare at girls or pretend to be masculine men. Boys feel entitled to be the only person who's sexuality or gender are valid.

And I think this is proven even by something like starfield giving you the OPTION to have trans pronouns. Not forcing it. Not making it a big deal. Just having an option so cis people can chose that option and non-cis people can chose whatever they want. I see no universe where adding options without taking away from anyone while broadening the horizons of the medium is a bad thing. Yet dudes will still get memed to hell over 'FUCKING PRONOUNS'. WE haven't even played Intergalactic or Witcher IV but people are bitching because 'ew, female protagonist I don't want to fuck and that's bad' or 'Ciri's mature now, She's no longer the teenager I want to fuck' (yuck, by the way).

So yeah, we need to get past what woke means and start asking people why they think it's a bad thing...because that's where the shittiness really starts to come out. And that's the ultimate direction the conversation is heading when people ask 'what is woke', because any time it's asked, they have to come to terms with the reality that they're actively stifling cultural progress for their own entitlement issues. or just straight up bigotry.



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android

Runa216 said:

I legitimately feel like we need to move on from the 'definition' of woke and start asking people, regardless of how they see 'wokeness', why they think it's a bad thing.

Because that's where we start to really peel off the mask and make it abundantly clear how callous and heartless and ignorant these people are.

Even if you think it's a case of 'forced representation ruining the integrity of the medium', I have to ask...how is that a bad thing? Change hurts sometimes. And it's been a boy's club for so long that if we need the artistic value of the medium to be taken seriously we NEED To diversify. We need non-traditional roles. we need to open up games to everyone. Women deserve to have unfiltered representation. Sometimes that means supermodel babes, sometimes that means homely badasses and neither are bad UNLESS you feel entitled to only have YOUR Fantasies fulfilled (As in, either playing as a strong muscly man or being able to gawk at the supermodel ass). If forced inclusion and woke themes are ruining the medium...then it WILL correct itself in time. If people genuinely do stop buying games that have progressive themes, the money hungry corporations will ABSOLUTELY stop making them, or at least find ways to cater to the insecure boys that are complaining.

The problem is a feeling of entitlement. Boys feel entitled to stare at girls or pretend to be masculine men. Boys feel entitled to be the only person who's sexuality or gender are valid.

And I think this is proven even by something like starfield giving you the OPTION to have trans pronouns. Not forcing it. Not making it a big deal. Just having an option so cis people can chose that option and non-cis people can chose whatever they want. I see no universe where adding options without taking away from anyone while broadening the horizons of the medium is a bad thing. Yet dudes will still get memed to hell over 'FUCKING PRONOUNS'. WE haven't even played Intergalactic or Witcher IV but people are bitching because 'ew, female protagonist I don't want to fuck and that's bad' or 'Ciri's mature now, She's no longer the teenager I want to fuck' (yuck, by the way).

So yeah, we need to get past what woke means and start asking people why they think it's a bad thing...because that's where the shittiness really starts to come out. And that's the ultimate direction the conversation is heading when people ask 'what is woke', because any time it's asked, they have to come to terms with the reality that they're actively stifling cultural progress for their own entitlement issues. or just straight up bigotry.

You wouldn't listen to a explanation anyways.
You would twist words... give your own explanations for what your assumptions of people are (like in your post above).
Label people, with names instead.

This thread has been about, not just the "what is woke", but also people saying why they don't want it in games.

Your response has been to write posts like you just did, all thread long.
And apparently, you didn't take away anything anyone said (because their views don't matter to you).
This is just a thread for you to berate others.

Fact of the matter is, most of the world isn't as progressive as you are.

"If forced inclusion and woke themes are ruining the medium...then it WILL correct itself in time. If people genuinely do stop buying games that have progressive themes, the money hungry corporations will ABSOLUTELY stop making them,.."

This is the hope, of the anti-woke side.
If enough games that are super woke, and or play bad (because of it), they at least get punished for making a bad game.

Runa216 said:

at this point I just sort of hope the whole world burns if those are the values you and so many others like to valorize.

Your take on this subject is really extreme.
You get that right?

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 29 December 2024