I don't get why a tiny problem like that makes computers batshit unusable.
I have neither sanity nor happiness. | Discord: Eltro#4304
Joined on 4/12/08
Posted by Eltro2kneo - June 23rd, 2018
The Difficulty Curve of MSL and the Player Base that Contradicts it
____I've been playing this gacha game since early December 2016. I've taken my several month breaks whenever I either finish the game's single player content, or was frustrated with one of the capture events (or when a large hurricane knocked down my electricity forcing me to wait four months to be back online).
The game's units are broken down in five levels of rarity, all of which can be ascended to 6-stars (unlike Dokkan Battle where most of the units can upgrade their rarity only once):
1-star: Common unit with single target active: Slimes, Mimics and Sparklers.
2-stars: Common unit with either ST, AoE or healing active.
3-stars (84% summon rate): Rare/S. Rare unit that can be summoned from the Special Shop.
4-stars (15% summon rate): Legendary unit either exclusive to story stages or can be summoned from the Special Shop.
5-stars (1% summon rate): Heroic unit that can be summoned from the Special Shop.
____Regardless of further expansion, the game's difficulty curve allows for nat2 units to still be able to beat the original campaign and their limit would be half of the first continental expansion most of the time. Nat3s can get past a good portion of the second expansion, while nat4s are the minimum to finish the whole campaign. When nat5s are a necessity is during the mid to high portions of the dragon dungeons, as well as pvp and guild battles.
____Despite the game's easy difficulty curve, the units below the nat5 (sometimes nat4) rarity are regarded as a waste of resources by the player base. This is exclusively based on multiplayer modes like pvp and mostly guilds. Typically the complaint is "this unit is useless for end-game" or "this unit is strong in early-game but it's quickly fodder in mid-game". The "end-game" argument is where the bias normally comes from and is a poor justification to dismiss certain units when there's no concrete "end-game" to begin with.
____What's "end-game"? In this context, it's pvp and guilds. It refers to the last thing the player would be doing after passing all the relevant single player modes and starts participating in multiplayer modes that reset weekly. "End-game" can be another way of saying that the player has beaten the main game. So the "end-game" goal can be other things like completing the whole album of units, grinding in preparation for future content, or just taking a break until new content gets released. You can do whatever the fuck in the "end-game" state.
Let's go back to the player base's histrionic judgment regarding a unit's strength. Because from there comes a lot of fallacious arguments and some minor misconceptions about the game's content:
Appeal to Authority:
____This one's the originator of a lot of misunderstandings and misinformation about the game spread by a large number of scrubs who've recently read beginner guides and calculations from the game's sub-reddit. When you ask them why they came to a particular conclusion, they answer with "because a veteran player says so".
____The "veteran player" who's assumed to have infallible authority is either A) a youtube channel with a big following, B) a player with a high profile level, C) a player who's been around since the early days of the game, or D) a player who ran through the game in a very short time.
____The problem with all four options is that none of them directly correlate to how much the player knows about the game. It doesn't matter how many subs, profile levels, months or how fast the player was at clearing content. All that matters is how far in the game the player has gotten, how that experience is exercised, and the research that was done. And even then, "because mom says so" is still not a justification.
Some players have genuinely datamined the game and shared the info around in the game's subreddit.
Similar to the appeal to authority, except it's under the basis of a popular practice. When you ask them why they came to a particular conclusion, they answer with "because a friend told me", or "because everyone does it".
____A certain practice is said to be popular, but it doesn't explain why it's a popular practice. This lead to common myths like the Pugilist gem set being based on hits, Predator being a direct multiplier to damage (when it's a flat increase to the elemental damage multiplier), and that Golems B7 and B9 are "too hard". When a certain practice is demonstrably good, it spreads, not the other way around.
____This is done to primarily butcher what "usability" means. Most of the time, it's not a question of "is it usable?" but more so "how usable is it?". When there exists 500+ units of distinct purposes and strength, simplifying it to black and white is not a good form of judgment. This type of judgment can also be considered a bad generalization.
____Another instance of a false dichotomy is when it's used as an excuse to dismiss probabilistic math just because of Critical Hit Rate not being 100%. They simplify it to being either 100% or none when it statistically doesn't work that way.
____This one's very annoying because once the question is made, the answer leads to nowhere. They answer with "X is Y because X is Y". Or "this monster's stronger because it just is". Answering a certain question with circular reasoning is like saying nothing at all.
____This happens when a particular word (or formula) completely changes meaning mid topic. An example of this is when a passive skill formula is considered to be a "multiplier", only for it to be used as an "additional increase" when applied. Originally, it was going to multiply damage, but half way it was changed to an additional increase onto a base of 1, which is way different from multiplying.
This was an awful argument to come across because the guy making the "CS is a 5x multiplier" argument was being serious about it while demonstrating that it's a 6x multiplier based on the logic of it being an additional increase of 5.
Argument from Ignorance:
____This is the absolute worst of all the arguments I was thrown at. Most of the time, this is used to dismiss the concept of probability (a thing that's essential to understanding the game's RNG). Other times it's to dismiss the stats of two units as an excuse to downplay a high grade unit, just because the low grade has slightly better proc rates in its passive skills despite the stats being abysmal.
____Just because the person doesn't understand or doesn't care about it, doesn't mean that the thing in question shouldn't matter or doesn't exist when it's in the game.
Nat5s are undoubtedly the strongest rarity along with a few nat4s, but the game's main difficulty curve makes them a bit overkill, to where there's no problem in using nat3s.
(Originally this was going to be much longer, but I rambled too much on the game's development over time and the good and bad decisions they made along the way.)
Posted by Eltro2kneo - August 27th, 2017
____My disappointment in Minds (a self-proclaimed "free speech alternative" to social media) began on February 2017 when I wrote my first Minds blog expressing said displeasure. 90% of the time, the site has been promoting:
--Shit politics (one-sided politics that disregards Horseshoe Theory)
--Conspiratorial crap regarding all sorts of medicine.
--Alternative Media/New Media
____All of that was promoted in the form of "boosted content" (which the site later admitted that it's another form of ads the moment they introduced premium accounts that DISABLES boosted content from appearing). It was the breeding grounds for uncritical crackpots who'd actively pick fights over shit they fabricated. How long said crackpots existed is far besides the point.
____Its "BOOST" feature was meant to give a user's post "more reach" based on an assigned number of points for a number of views. Unfortunately, this game-like feature was used by people who treat viewcount like it's a form of credibility, and would block any user who decides to down vote their quackery (which is why their ratings never look negative).
____On April 2017, I saw some of the users in my subscriptions list get TERMINATED just 'cause some cunt was highly offended by some drawings. Apparently it's only "free speech" if it fits their agenda. Then I find out there were witch hunt groups made specifically to take down people they disagree with, causing me to go paranoid for several weeks.
____On May 2017, I made the quiet decision to never use Minds again. Thus, I started my GIF animation project which is a goodbye message to that platform. Since its userbase consisted of mostly ideologues and suspended Twitter/Facebook accounts, gaining ANY amount of followers there seemed like a terrible idea (especially 240+ followers).
____Originally, I used Minds to stay away from Twitter politics, and used Vidme to stay away from YouTube's crazy policy changes. I tried out Gab.ai (during mid 2016), but found there wasn't a point to it. Then there's Voat.co which is supposed to be an "alternative" to Reddit, but just like Reddit, there wasn't much of a reason for me to use it.
____But considering this politically histrionic climate, with YouTube restricting videos from core features, and Vidme taking down channels slowly; I'm not going to bother finding "alternatives to X" when the pandemic has already infected EVERY platform in existance.
Posted by Eltro2kneo - May 27th, 2017
____Originally, the title was going to be just "The DeviantArt Mentality", but then I figured people might think of... ... ... something else that's unrelated to what this is about.
I once tweeted something for artists who take great offense over the most inoffensive and harmless criticism: https://twitter.com/Eltro93/status/859673974304776192
It was something like this:
"Here's a thing about opinions and criticism. When you produce work and someone points out a few flaws or gives an opinion on what needs to be improved, they're not insulting you or trying to make you feel like shit. They're giving you a chance to improve.
Don't look at it as a failure, but as an opportunity to do better. And you will do better if you allow it. But if you choose to just cover your ears and label your critics as bad people trying to bring you down, you're not helping yourself and instead damaging your image.
Being unable to take criticism means you don't want to get better. And if you decide to cut communications, then no one should be buying your stuff to begin with."
____Unfortunately, I forgot to specify that it was constructive criticism, not to be lumped in with destructive criticism (which in my opinion, isn't criticism unlike the former). However, there's a story behind why I made that tweet. In early May, me and my friends were talking in a Discord group about some art tweets by one specific individual (let's call him "Kim"). We talked about what we liked, what we didn't like, where the artist needs to improve, etc. Then the artist tweeted an unfinished landscape of a bridge that's supposed to take place in an abandoned ancient level. It turns out the bridge looked more like it belonged in an early level, because of the coloring of the grass and the objects on the bridge being nowhere to be found in the ancient level. Everyone in the Discord group made similar comments. I tweeted at Kim that it looked more like it's from the Dragon Valley stage than Pangu Lagoon. Afterwords, he got rid of the objects that seemed out of place for an ancient level.
____But then, one of my friends (let's call him "Ren") shared an art tweet of a sketch for an OC who was easily mistaken to be an already existing canon character. Ren said that he immediately thought that the character was Lilac, because it looked just like her except for the lack of hearing aids. But the sketch is supposed to be an OC named Scarlet, and that she's more red colored than Lilac. Out of all the Lilac recolors we posted in the server, we were shocked that an artist like Kim would take that rout. I asked another guy (let's call him "Fry") to color the Scarlet sketch by using Lilac's palette just to see how similar she looks in design. She had the same hairdo, as well as the same top. What's supposed to be the dangling side of her scarf could easily be confused with the long twintails one would see from Lilac. Scarlet with Lilac's palette made her look indistinguishable, except for not having hearing aids.
____As soon as I tweeted Kim that his Scarlet looked too much like Lilac because of the hair and clothes, he blocked me (which lead me to even making that tweet about opinions and criticism). Afterwords, he made four tweets throwing a tantrum about the people who've made similar comments that I made, as if they were personal attacks to him. He also states that he has a problem with people who don't like recolors, admitting that his OC is in fact a Lilac recolor. Thus, he can't take criticism. And I was being polite to the guy.
____Then, weeks later, he throws another Twitter tantrum lecturing his audience about what "inspiration" is, only to demonstrate that he doesn't know what that word means. Inspiration is influence. It's when a person is given the motivation to do certain things. In practice, when a person says they "took inspiration", it usually means they saw or tried something they really liked and decided to use it on their own stuff (almost like borrowing elements from somewhere). Of course, it tends to get tangled with "plagiarism" sometimes, but a distinction can still be made. What's Kim's version of "inspiration"? That it's synonymous to "support". That, because you're making fan art or a fan game, you're somehow supporting the original authors, despite not giving them any cash for it or them not being interested in seeing your fan made content.
____What happened to this artist is what I would dub the "DeviantArt mentality". I call it that, because it's the kind of shitty behavior I often see in DeviantArt when posting recolor OCs in the Discord server. That, and the fact that a majority of the fandom are from DA. It's also the kind of mentality that artists get when they gain a huge following. It turns them into massive dicks.
____Now, onto what can be seen as a prequel to what happened above. It started off in late 2014 when I was obsessed with an indie game known as Freedom Planet. Because of it's heavy inspiration from Sonic games, I was initially hesitant to join any of its fandoms until a year later when the new forum was opened. Before the Discord app was a big thing, there used to be that crappy IRC chat that was barely used in the forum site. There was also a lot of fan fiction crap for only a year, until the fan fic writers lost motivation and left the forums, realizing not enough people bothered to read, and their demands for detailed criticism were just impractical (looking at you, Ultra). Then, there were headcanons being wrongfully passed on as official canon, never mind that their shit never happened in the game, and the fan fic writers made it up (plenty of fan fic written misinformation was discovered and debunked the moment Freedom Planet 2 was announced).
____During those years of this fandom (infested with DA users), there was one particular fan fic writer (let's call him "Zorn") who was writing a fan comic for the first game. I liked the idea of a comic adaptation as long as it didn't copy mistakes from the old Archie comics where lazily edgy characters were shoehorned in. Unfortunately, in the comic issues after the events of FP, of course he implanted a dark-suited edgelord OC. But then there was one comic issue drawn by an artist (let's call him "Shaggy") that caused the fan comic to get shat all over by someone who we'll call "Moo". It was probably the harshest criticism that Zorn received, it made him cancel the comic series abruptly, and resorted to writing the fan fic text-only. It torn his skin so much, he publicly announced that he quit the forums, just because Moo didn't like his fan fic. But then again, Moo makes rather ridiculous demands in general, and his fan fics were kinda shit to begin with (also a guy who blacklisted me because I don't like his fan fiction or his story philosophies being always grimdark).
____Speaking of the artist Shaggy, he was another story, and it heavily involved Ren. At first, Shaggy kinda liked the guy, until Ren decided to play Shaggy's Neera fan game. Apparently, Shaggy didn't like what he had to say about the game (if Ren said anything), thus he blacklisted him for the rest of his life. Since then, Shaggy's been perpetually taking the piss at Ren for any drawing he's done. At the time of Ren's depression, Shaggy went out of his way to make fun of his depression, called him "the biggest attention whore", as well as telling Ren to go kill himself in the official forums of all websites (pretty much the shittiest thing I don't condone). Unsurprisingly, that got Shaggy banned for a couple months. It doesn't help that his fanboys copy his shitty behavior (or even notice it outside of DeviantArt), which is no wonder Kim also blocks people for simply not liking Shaggy. Not only did Shaggy have a beef with Ren, he also had a beef with other artists because of nsfw art (never mind that this makes him a hypocrite, since he also does nsfw art). Overall, he gained a shitty reputation in the fandom, and he seems to be doing better when he's quiet and not lurking as much as he used to (because if he says anything, it's usually to start shit).
____Now, fast forwarding back to early May of this year, in the art channel of the Discord server, one guy was posting some casual MSpaint drawings. Of course, someone opened his mouth and said he wasn't a fan of the MSpaint art. Instead of the uploader shrugging it off, he took great offense to it, escalated the situation, and said he wont post anymore, even if people were not trying to tell him to stop showcasing.
____You might say that I'm only bringing up four artists and therefore it's not a good sample size. However, the fandom itself is around 500+ people, and each artist (especially Kim and Shaggy) has a large following of 300+ parrots. Much like when Shaggy made that KYS joke drawing (two actually, one that's titled "DO IT" with the old character handing over a revolver, and the other titled "JUST" with the new character pointing the revolver on her own head), nearly everyone of his fans took his drawings seriously to the point of rigging a character redesign poll on DeviantArt, as if they were pressured to do that or else they'd piss off their favorite artist.
____Of course, that's just a different kind of DeviantArt mentality where fanatics treat their artists like they're flawless, thus are incapable of disagreeing with their "idols".
____Other than that, you pretty much have hypersensitive artists who think it's okay to either commit internet suicide or be unreasonably defensive and blacklist people over the most inoffensive, petty tripe (basically, the DeviantArt mentality). I wouldn't mind the logic that it's important to separate the art from the artist, just like we should separate the franchise from the fandom. The art might be good, but the artist might be a shitty person. Or the franchise is amazing, but its fandom is cringy as fuck. But when the artist acts shitty because his art looks shitty, that's when the separation becomes difficult for me.
____An artist who lashes out at his own audience over something harmless and polite isn't the kind of artist I would support. And maybe not supporting them would at least discourage that childish behavior. Because without support, they'd go back to being nobodies and maybe rethink their attitudes (or not). Then again, doing so would be considered Orwellian or Draconian to some.
____The names Ren, Kim, Fry, Shaggy, Moo, Zorn, and Ultra are only nicknames I gave to avoid using their real names and their actual pseudonyms. As much as I take the piss out of DeviantArt, I have nothing against people using the service, especially when some good artists can be found there.
Posted by Eltro2kneo - May 3rd, 2017
____A color space is a combination of parameters (typically three) that represent color. Change the value of a certain parameter, and the color would change accordingly. There's a series of color spaces for different purposes:
--RYB Traditional Color Space (well, as I was taught at a young age anyway): It's a combination of Red, Yellow and Blue. Something I played with in early elementary school during art class.
--RGB Additive Color Space: Similar to RYB, but with green instead of yellow. It's a combination of Red, Green and Blue that's used for TV screens and computer monitors. Combining all three primaries at the brightest intensity produces white.
--CMYK Subtractive Color Space: Technically RGB's polar opposite. It's a combination of Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and blacK that's used for printing. Since combining the first three primaries produces a dark (and ugly) brown instead of black, a fourth primary was included for a better representation of black, and for the sake saving some CMY ink.
____There's plenty of other color spaces to go around, but then there's the HSV color space and its close cousin HSL. They were designed primarily to be more intuitive and are commonly used for image editing and digital art. Unfortunately, since they're rearrangements of the RGB color space, their cylinder coordinates are filled with redundant colors at the top and bottom of said cylinder.
To begin, the Hue coordinate is one thing that both HSV and HSL have in common. It acts like a color wheel that uses degrees.
0° = Red
60° = Yellow
120° = Green
180° = Cyan
240° = Blue
300° = Magenta
____The Saturation coordinate in HSV and HSL determines how clean the color appears. However, the way saturation works in HSV is not the same as in HSL. It's true that 100% saturation in HSV is the same as in HSL, but it's a different story when it's at any level below 100%. The lower the saturation in HSV, the closer it gets to white. But in HSL, the lower the saturation, the closer it gets to gray.
____The Value coordinate in HSV determines how intense the color is. Seems simple enough, the lower the value the closer it gets to black. It's different with the Lightness coordinate in HSL though. While colors come closer to black when turning down the Value or Lightness in HSV and HSL, 100% Value in HSV is 50% Lightness in HSL. 100% Lightness is considered white, which is 100% Value and 0% Saturation in HSV. So, greater lightness is closer to white, while lower lightness is closer to black.
(The full version of this blog can be read here: https://www.minds.com/blog/view/706401383749787664 )
Posted by Eltro2kneo - February 1st, 2017
"Sexualization" is one thing, but "oversexualization" is simply a redundant word. You don't need the "over-" prefix to describe the fact that a particular character either wears too little clothing or has too large of breasts. And this almost exclusively applies to women characters for some odd reason (yeah, so much for """gender equality""" when it's okay to sexually objectify men).
Typically, to me, when a female character's outfit is just unrealistically too small, or small for the wrong body type, or the breasts are way bigger than her head; I wouldn't find her sexy. There are some times she looks better naked, and other times (or most of the time), she looks better with clothes on. So what the fuck does it mean to be "oversexualized"? The word itself implies that it's okay to sexualize, but not okay to sexualize too much. And to what point is it "too much"? Well, when a character's outfit is generally too small and the breasts being bigger than the head, but it seems that isn't the case with people who get triggered by belly shirts and shorts of all things, and the simple fact the girl has breasts at all.
As a result, you have a few artists that draw noodle girls (essentially flat chested, and no hour glass body shape whatsoever), and transgirls (girls with male shaped bodies). While there isn't a problem with noodle girls and muscle girls (in fact, some are pretty awesome), there are some artists that do this under the agenda that drawing breasts (even at normal proportions) on a female character is sexist and that it should be shamed (no, it fucking shouldn't).
And because of that trash agenda, their art tends to look like this:
(intentional exaggeration, not what it literally looks like)
Yet they wonder why some people (who are not even into T&A) find their shit bland. Because those artists looked at so many unnecessarily large breasts and thought "breasts are an oversexualization!!!11one", that they completely forget that women in general naturally have breasts.
I like noodle girls and some muscle girls, as long as there isn't an agenda behind those body types.
Posted by Eltro2kneo - September 4th, 2016
____So I've been less active on Newgrounds, and more active on social networks like Twitter and, most recently, Minds. Newgrounds for as long as I registered (and this was before deleting all the embarassing whiny teen blogs) has been my only platform for blogging (long before doing art submissions) and enjoying other people's animated content.
____Since the growth of YouTube, the content here was getting stale and a lot of the animators were leaving. This meant that I was less likely to search for entertainment in this site. Fortunately, the Art Portal gave me a reason to stay longer. Besides, it's a better alternative to the foot inflation that is Deviant Art (no offense to the well talented artists who use that site).
____Layout wise, Newgrounds does a great job at the Games, Movies, Audio and Art portals. However, it's not very good for blog feeds, nor does it encourage it as much. Compared to the year I registered (2008), the way blogs are made has improved with the editing and the new emoticons, sure, but that's about it.
____Just recently, I found a new social network called 'Minds' (though still in beta). The way it works is that it's suppose to be a free speech alternative to Facebook, Twitter and YouTube since PC and SJWs took over. Not only does it have a Twitter-ish timeline, it also lets you create blogs in almost the same way you write them here, but with the addition of a user defined image background, lisences, making them public or private, and even marking some of your blogs as Mature Content if applicable.
____This is not to say that I will move to another site. Instead, I'm going to use Minds.com to write full versions of my future blogs, and I'll use this site to write the short versions (or even previews) while linking the full versions here. The format would look something like this:
<<<link to the minds.com blog>>>
<<<short version or preview of the minds.com blog with 1024 characters max>>>
IF: The minds.com blog is less than 1024 characters long.
THEN: The blog is directly copied here.
ELSE: The Newgrounds blog gets the shorter version plus a link to the full version.
I'm not going to stop using this site. I'll still post some of my art and stuff here (and there as well), so I'm not going anywhere.
All I'm saying is, you can also follow me on the websites that are on the left of my NG page. Thanks for reading.
Posted by Eltro2kneo - July 19th, 2016
About a year ago (August to December 2015), I took this easy computer science course where all you learn to use is MS Office and Google Drive. There were a couple asignments envolving PowerPoint presentations and how to use buttons and hyperlinks. Instead of using PowerPoint's buttons, I drew mine from scratch with GIMP.
It was also mandatory to include at least one YouTube video, so I made a YouTube button.
About a semester later (January to May 2016), I looked back at these buttons that I made and figured "the yellow color looks a little washed and there isn't that many reds". Another problem I found with these buttons is that they exceed 15 colors, making them not qualify as 4-bit sprites.
A 4-bit sprite is a raster image containing only 4 bits of color information per pixel. The number of bits is the number of binary combinations in powers of two. So a 4-bit image, is an image that contains a maximum of 2^4 unique colors, which is 16. The reason I said "15 colors" instead of 16 for an image is because the 16th color is transparent when it comes to images with a transparent color.
I picked "15 colors" for the next time because, in the 90s with SNES, MegaDrive, CPS2 and Neo Geo, most sprites were limited to only 4 bits of color information, meaning every character was limited to no more than 15 colors (not counting the transparent background). This caused a lot of blonde characters to have hair that almost matched their skin color, and some main colors sharing shades.
Anyway, on March 2016, I decided to redo my PowerPoint buttons with 5 reds, 5 yellows, and 5 blues with higher contrast.
Yeah, there's grayish blue for the background, but that's another thing about background color. It's the only thing that's converted to transparent. Other than that, I've added more buttons, one for sound, one for video, one for links, and another for just a selection (the red sphere button).