u/Semicolon5

Something that's been bugging me with a lot of the recent drama and arguments is that a lot of people, especially vocal ones promoting AI, say that artists need to learn how computers/the internet works (even going as far as to belittle and call them dumb), yet aren't expected to learn the arts.

I don't mean by "picking up a pencil" and actually drawing. I mean learning how art works, how genres/movements work, their history, and how the art community acts. I've seen people display ignorance on how art works, either using the toilet/banana or minimalism as a "gotcha" against effort in art - which doesn't even apply because the former are examples of Modern Art, which is about ideas/concepts and isn't how most contemporary artists work; and minimalism still requires effort, mainly in the "economy in art" - as in the usage of little to achieve more, which for some artists is very difficult.

Or the idea of the fundamentals of art and design, and why a detailed AI-generated piece doesn't work because while it uses a lot of the superficial traits of what people consider good art, it fails in actually utilizing what critically matters - like the aforementioned economy and understanding "less is more"; or how colors work; or how images are structured - which can also be connected to the photography argument wherein people say it's "just pressing a button" even though actual photographers need a lot of experience to make a photograph beautiful or interesting.

Then there's just the misunderstanding of the art community and it's various subjects for argument, like consent in using art or how critique/development work. I've seen some people dumbfounded that the art community is fine with "poor/shitty" art, when it's no stranger to me since there's always been an unspoken rule about helping new artists by being supportive and being easy with criticism - as in recognizing someone's skill and applying the right level of critique.

There's more, but overall I feel like I'm speaking to people who can't speak my language. I've been part of the art community for basically 20 years and all of this is natural to me - so to see people insist upon being part of the arts, yet display total ignorance, is rather frustrating at the worst of times.

I may not understand deeper programming, but I at least accept it and keep my criticisms/observations where it is appropriate. Yet how is it I am "dumb" for not understanding computers as well, yet the same people won't educate themselves on something they're so insistent on getting into?

Apologies beforehand if this comes across as heated. It's just so annoying how my expertise is looked down upon, something that seems more frequent in this day and age.

For personal reasons I want to get into One Piece. Besides the anime I also wanted to try my hand at the Pirate Warriors games since the DW games did a great job getting me into the history of Romance of the Three Kingdoms.

So my question: Which of the Pirate Warriors games offers the best representation of the story so far? I know the series has continued beyond each iteration of the games, but I'm wanting something that'll really do the best in covering the story - and I don't want to make the mistake of assuming the current 4th one is the one that'll do it.

Thank you in advance.

I'm sure that a lot of you are like me and have engaged in worldbuilding possibly as far back as high school. Maybe your worlds were all about rule of cool, epic fights, fantastical creatures and whatever hyperfixation was present at the time (mine was Westerns). But as you grow older things change. Maybe your world matures alongside you; maybe things get less black/white; culture, politics and history are focused more than the epic battles and action/survival.

So I want to ask: How different is your world now then when it began? Did it mature alongside you? Did it remain mostly the same? Or did you wipe the slate clean and nothing of your new world has any connections to what came before.

Thank you in advance for any replies.

https://preview.redd.it/qkb8bkclq1fh1.png?width=1346&format=png&auto=webp&s=b8f7efd99455fe80670bd6a7b180bcf74d746c80

NGL before 5 and 7 I thought Xaihou Yuan was pretty generic. Didn't care for his move-set and his overall look made me disinterested in playing him. Then 5 and especially 7 came along and I just love the guy. It had been over 14 years since I played 7 when it first came out and seeing him poke his head out to look at Jia Xu's still makes me chuckle.

Currently on Jin, can't wait to get to the extra stuff with Xtreme Legends.

Whether it's here or any of the other AI-focused sub-reddits I'm bound to see a post that basically amounts to, "Actually, if you hate or even criticize AI it means you are a bad artist/writer/creative and your ego is so big that you can't stand anyone being better than you (which they are by the way). Only good, objectively talented artists, like AI."

And it just smacks dab of arrogance and disrespect, and the idea that there is this measurement of morality/legitimacy of opinion or validation of skill tied to whether you like AI or not. Which is ignorant because there's a multitude of reasons people may either dislike or even be concerned with generative AI, and not to mention an issue of adaptability when it comes to technology - both in the ability to use it or even the accessibility. Heck, some people dislike generative AI because of the current political/corporate landscape, and are making a moral stance. And even some who do criticize AI only do so in the creative field, but are far more open to its usage in the scientific field as well as logistics, medicine, and data-handling.

Not to mention what sort of imagery is being disliked. Remember that algorithms favor short-form addictive content, and for some people all they see are content farms churning out entertaining though unintelligent media. It's always been that way before AI, but the very nature of the tech in allowing greater accessibility with relatively cheaper costs means that those that do churn out such content are more likely to pivot towards it - and thus create such media that's often referred to as "AI Slop". As such it's what most people see as 'AI content' overall, and so their opinion can be pointed negatively (if not at least considering less valuable or 'artistic' versus other mediums, which is no different when gaming came into being and was only arcades - versus now where visually grand/artistic and in-depth stories are more common-place). It's no wonder that with how algorithms work that it took a very long time to find any worthwhile art made with AI - and although I'm not interested in the technology, I'm not gonna go after people or deny adequate critique where applicable. If someone gave me actual art (not memes or rage-bait) I'll give it the same level of artistic criticism I do any piece - I just won't use because it's simply not how I do it, and how I make art is satisfactory.

Still, I feel tying opinion of AI to the apparent "worth" of an artist is a recipe for disaster. You alienate artists further and create this potential environment for elitism/toxicity where only artist that have a positive opinion of AI can be allowed the consideration of being "good". It's presumptuous to assume that one can dictate what can be considered a good or bad artist simply because of their opinion regarding AI.

Basically, what is a historical/important figure in your world that is referenced or even honored/glorified that, ironically, would actually hate either the world and/or the people using their name?

Example: The Emperor of Mankind from Warhammer 40k. In his life he fought to make humanity a powerful empire that would pray to no gods and would strive to make itself great and enlightened. After his is eternally sat onto the Golden Throne the Imperium worships him as a god and has fallen into religious zealotry and dystopian cruelty, forever ruining whatever progress or ideals the Emperor had when creating it.

Zhang Jiao (DW: Origins)

Yuan Shao (DW 7)

Lately replaying 5 in between sessions of Origins and I was reminded of how Ling Tong went from a pretty alright fighter to getting characterized as lazy in 7 & 8, and some of those lines used in Origins. I never was a fan since it felt weird making Ling Tong the "lazy guy", and especially Origins where his whole thing is getting trained by Ziluan.

So it made me curious: What is your favorite and least favorite character evolution between games? What characters did you think got changed for the better/worse over time?

For me my favorite is Zhang Jiao from the mainline series to Origins. I liked how he became a more tragic figure, and while 7 made him more interesting with him calling out the faction's respective fates in the opening mission I really love what Origins did with him.

As for least favorite: Yuan Shao. I didn't play 6 but when I played 7 I was confused why they went and turned Yuan Shao from a serious commander to a pompous jerk. It really detracted from both his leadership in the coalition army and his rivalry with Cao Cao. I'm glad they toned it back down with Origins (I've yet to play 9 so I don't know if that's still a thing).

So I wanted to put a dark-twist on the "aliens that look like humans but different" trope with my Kronians - an alien race that look like pale-white humans with black/red eyes but are actually insects.

The reason is that they used to be completely insectoid in appearance (basically human-sized mantises with an early agriculture level of technological advancement) but were abducted by a branch of installer humanity that happened to arrive on their system due to warp-travel. For reasons lost to time these insects were enslaved and genetically/surgically altered to appear human. Their "skin" is just chitin softened and altered to look like skin at a glance, and their limbs were changed to look human with arms/legs with hands/feet at the end. Eventually they revolted and slaughtered their human captors, then took centuries to understand their technology so as to travel back to their home world and become dismayed that despite still using a combination of pheromones and vocal/visual based communication as their ancestors they refuse to talk to them because they look human. Basically shunned by their own homeworld. Worse yet their genetics were altered so much that it's basically impossible for them to return to their original appearance, and their offspring will also look human - so they'll forever look like their enslavers.

Complicating things is another branch of humanity arrives and begins settling the galaxy, unaware of another set of travellers coming by centuries/millenia before (because warp-travel also fucks with time/space). So they not only had no clue of human involvement, but their excuses of having not known in the face of Kronian's getting angry at them only makes things worse - becoming the lead up to a war between the two interstellar races.

Basically I want to explore these ideas of humanity being both the "alien precursors" responsible for another alien race's torment, and the humans who arrive to meet these aliens. As well this idea of how an alien race hates humanity because they look like them, and basically have a culture where they worship/respect their former "alien" appearance because another race wanted them to be more "aesthetically pleasing". I also want to explore the theme of generational fault, and how the mistakes of past generations can not only make things worse for those in the future, but also how much responsibility does the future possess.

But still I ask: does this make the humanity of my story too unlikeable? It's not the direct fault of the humans in the story, and those that did it are long dead, but they also can't do anything to fix it because they both don't know how (and due to circumstances said technology is lost), and from their perspective it's technically "not their fault".

I'm open to any ideas. Thank you.

I never played 9 because of the buzz surrounding it, but playing Origins I really like Cheng Pu and Zhou Cang, and also a little bit of Hua Xiong and Yuan Shu. DW5 is a favorite because of how much it focused on the characters, more so than 7-8 did - and I really do miss that aspect. I know the English dub isn't good, but if I were to put on the Japanese/Chinese dub is it worth pushing through for the story/character moments? Or would I just wait (and pray) that another Dynasty Warriors game comes along and doesn't just cut them and any other characters out?

I myself play Shu, then Wu, then Wei because before 7 I liked playing the good guys, the "other guys" as I called them, then the bad guys (and also because Shu was my favorite Kingdom since 4). I still do it after 7, but now I like leaving Wei last because it's the lead in to Jin.