The debate about generative AI for images is an interesting one because it’s clear it can easily take work away from human artists. A few years ago when AI was a bit inconsistent and drew obvious errors like humans with extra/missing fingers, then you couldn’t use these images in a professional context without editing the image, but then maybe you would need to hire someone with those editing skills to fix it.
With how creative these AI models can be, it has the likes of JimllPaintIt fearing for the future. Images can be generated in a famous artist’s style, so what happens if people can just generate ones in the style of JimllPaintIt?
In a now deleted thread, he stated:
“My attitude towards AI “art” has – in a short space of time – gone from mild disinterest to acute irritation to absolute despair for the future of humanity. The most depressing thing is seeing artists embrace it. Talk about turkeys voting for Christmas.”
JimllPaintIt
Some others raised a good point, that the person typing the prompts still needs to be creative:
“The irony I have seen so far is that the best results from it come from talented artists. I don’t think it’s the awful thing you think it is. Talent is still needed for vision. I think it just opens up art to more people who have vision but not necessarily the physical skills.”
The animator Cyriak then chimes in:
I’m sure musicians have great record collections as well. The idea that “skills” and “talent” are magical properties some people are born with is rubbish. “talent” is just being bothered to keep trying, and skill accumulates as you keep trying.
Cyriak
Which I think isn’t correct. It’s more like a combination of what you are born with, then learned skill, (nature/nurture) as someone else points out:
In that case, if you kept practising you could run faster than Usain Bolt? or is he just naturally faster than you?
Matt_Francis
“I don’t draw pictures by running in a straight line with pencils tied to my shoes. I’m not sure anyone does”
Cyriak
Not sure what Cyriak’s response even means. Is he saying it’s a completely different skill so art is from practice, but physique is natural?
People keep talking about how AI will take away Software Developer’s jobs but at the moment, I think it can be used to take away some of the tedious aspects, and also give a good starting point (boilerplate code) to then enhance with your skills. You also need to understand how to ask the AI to realise your vision. I think there are comparisons in the Art world, but I think it’s easier to understand how their jobs are impacted more directly. ie Hiring an artist for one (or a few images) when you can use AI – versus hiring a developer for a few weeks to get a fully working program/website.
Artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly prevalent, no longer confined to science fiction. In some industries it may just enhance minor aspects, but in others, it is replacing processes. AI programs today can generate realistic deep-fake videos, simulate voices, create images, write essays, and even compose poems or songs.
While these creations are (mostly) not yet indistinguishable from reality, they are convincing enough to deceive many. Major companies are integrating AI into their operations, often at the expense of human jobs. Customer support has been partially replaced by chat bots. Websites are now flooded with AI-generated articles, and the likes of X are full of bots that use AI to repost a summary just to farm engagement.
The influence of AI on our future is undeniable. Even this blog was partially written by AI. I stole a transcript from a YouTube video that made some good points, and turned it into a blog using AI. Deleted some parts, rewrote others, shuffled paragraphs around, and mixed in some of my own opinion and information from other sources.
One thing to always keep in mind is how the creator’s ideas can then become a bias in the algorithms. This was seen in Google’s Gemini, which severely favoured political correctness over accuracy.
Like many discovered weaknesses, it is exploited by people for humorous effect. People asked Gemini to make an image of the Pope or a World War II German Soldier and they got a dark skinned version. Even the founders of Google were turned into Asians. The bias was so extreme, that the only reliable way to get white people was to ask AI to generate absurd racial stereotypes which would then be switched for a white person. This could be abused by asking for a person doing a mild stereotype and it would instinctively choose to draw a dark-skinned person whereas a non-biassed algorithm might have just defaulted to white.
So using Gemini, you couldn’t get a historically accurate image of most people, and could only create images of white people if it was in jest.
It was so bad that you couldn’t even ask for white actors, because that isn’t inclusive. But you can ask for only black, because that is inclusive.
OK, hear me out.
Google's Gemini does seem to be racist, and I think it is more than just the Large Language Model teaching itself.
After @elonmusk's posts, I was skeptical, but I then asked Google's Gemini 2 simple questions.
When it comes to impersonating celebrities, it seemed to make out that it cannot impersonate people in the case that the person held right-wing views or provided controversial opinions, but then it had no problem with left-wing opinions.
Google’s Gemini AI isn’t just bias, it’s broken. Its responses are extremely offensive & arguably slanderous at times.
Today, I tested it using it the exact same prompt each time, only changing names & these were the results.
In a now deleted tweet, there was a thread about the creator of Gemini posting several tweets about left-wing politics, systematic racism, and white privilege. All the usual phrases of woke activists.
Young people in particular will use AI for information, potentially at the expense of critical thinking. As AI becomes more integrated into education, media, and social platforms, it has the power to influence societal narratives, political opinions, and perceptions of history. This raises questions about the ethical responsibilities of AI developers and the potential consequences of unchecked technological influence. Prominent figures like Elon Musk have voiced such concerns.
As AI continues to be a prominent part of our lives, it’s important to understand any underlying bias, and any limitations of what it can and cannot do.
One fascinating development has been AI-generated game simulations—models trained to generate video game frames based on existing gameplay footage. These systems often resemble playable versions of classic titles like Minecraft or Doom, but in reality, they’re more akin to interactive videos than fully functioning games.
While visually impressive, these AI-generated experiences are fundamentally limited. They operate by predicting the next frame, rather than running a dynamic game engine. This means they perform well under predictable conditions—opening doors, shooting enemies—but can quickly “hallucinate” inconsistencies when a player moves unpredictably, leading to bizarre visual errors.
Despite their novel appeal, these AI-driven simulations are not the future of gaming. The attention they’ve received is largely driven by press releases from AI companies eager to position themselves at the forefront of technological innovation. While these projects highlight advancements in AI model sophistication, they’re far from replacing traditional game engines.
There are three key reasons why these systems are unlikely to make a lasting impact on game development:
1. Consistency Issues
These AI models generate frames based on prior footage, rather than maintaining a persistent world state. This can result in sudden shifts in location or enemies appearing out of nowhere, making gameplay unpredictable and unreliable.
2. Data and Hardware Limitations
Training these models requires vast amounts of gameplay data—often spanning years of recorded footage. Additionally, the immense computational power makes them incredibly resource-intensive and requires a prohibitively expensive graphics card. While players love running Doom on unconventional devices, this AI-driven Doom may be the most expensive version yet.
3. Game Stability and Evolution
Unlike traditional game engines, these AI models depend on static, unchanging titles for training. They can’t adapt to evolving game mechanics or updates, making them ill-suited for modern game development, which often sees drastic iteration throughout production. Old games like Doom, or the more recent Bleeding Edge have ceased development, making them good choices for this research.
As these AI-generated game simulations continue to emerge, it’s important to approach them with a degree of skepticism. While industry figures like Phil Spencer and Satya Nadella may speculate on AI’s role in game preservation, the real question is: what do the creators of these systems say? The truth is, they aren’t making bold claims about AI reshaping game development—because they understand the inherent limitations.
Video game creation and development remain largely unaffected by these experimental AI-driven projects. Even as generative AI becomes a hot topic, separating hype from reality is crucial. These systems don’t threaten traditional gaming, but they do provide a fascinating glimpse into AI’s capabilities—and its current shortcomings.
Twitter was a really strong brand, so Elon’s instance to change it to X seemed like a baffling choice, and it seems one based on his fascination with the letter X rather than any business reason.
As a… – user I want… – a strategically-timed, comprehensive rebrand so that… – negative discourse regarding company practices can be briefly veiled with commentary regarding new name, logo, and brand assets, alongside excessively-shared parodies of the brand in meme format pic.twitter.com/5OuZLtg9pg
As a…
– user
I want…
– a strategically-timed, comprehensive rebrand
so that…
– negative discourse regarding company practices can be briefly veiled with commentary regarding new name, logo, and brand assets, alongside excessively-shared parodies of the brand in meme format
1/
x is an awesome letter, one of the coolest letters in fact! I just turned 8 years old and I think the letter x is the most coolest thing there is. anyway, my dad made me chicken nuggets so I can’t finish the thread right now
here’s why everyone is WRONG about twitter changing its name to x being “a baffling choice” and “not a smart thing to do”: a thread
1/ x is an awesome letter, one of the coolest letters in fact! I just turned 8 years old and I think the letter x is the most coolest thing there is. anyway, my dad made me chicken nuggets so I can’t finish the thread right now
All jokes aside, I did find a serious thread that was actually useful in detail the reason for X:
The X era has begun at Twitter Elon Musk says the bird logo will be replaced by an X. For Musk, it’s the continuation of a story that began 25 years ago. Here’s a brief history on that...
Let’s go back to 1999. After selling his first company… …Musk set out to disrupt banking. And the X identity was born. But its time as a standalone brand would be short-lived. Instead, X became part of another brand.
X became part of PayPal. And PayPal was acquired by eBay. Musk walked away with $165 million. He then started building again… …and the letter X would reappear.
Musk would launch Space Exploration Technologies Corporation. It would become known as SpaceX.
Worth noting… SpaceX’s logo has a hidden message. The X symbolizes a rocket’s trajectory.
Musk also used “X” at Tesla. It’s the name of Tesla’s third model. Musk envisioned a car lineup with models that spelled out “sexy.” There’s a Model S. An X. And a Y. Ford had the rights to the Model E. So Musk instead opted for 3, which is basically a backwards E.
X is even the name of Musk’s young son.
Meanwhile, you likely saw all of the headlines leading up to this development… …from rebranding Twitter as X Corp… …to the recent launch of xAI. In other words, wheels were already in motion for the new era.
Honey is a browser extension now owned by PayPal. It promised cheap deals to the user by automatically searching for vouchers and applying them at checkout. However, there seems to be some possible foul play in the way that it worked.
Honey was adding itself as a referrer which sounds logical if the user has made their own way there. Referral links give a financial kickback to the referrer so would be fine to give Honey some credit for assuring the end user completes the purchase.
The end user uses honey with the promise of searching for valid voucher codes to save further money. However, even when Honey couldn’t find anything, they still stole the referral. To the end user, this didn’t affect them because it was the referrer that was missed out. So all those YouTubers that had affiliate links will have lost out money, or future affiliate deals and sponsorships.
The ironic thing is that Honey gained a lot of new users from YouTube partnerships themselves. So YouTube audience would install the Honey extension, then any future affiliate links from the YouTuber (and any other YouTuber) would be then hijacked by Honey. So the YouTuber has been completely scammed but would be unaware it was happening at all.
There was another suggestion that Honey even did deals with shops to limit the discounts offered. So if there was a voucher available for 20% off, they would lie and say they have found 10% off. So Honey promised to find the best deal for you without you making any effort, but they were just finding mediocre deals for you and you could have got a better deal if you did put the effort in.
For some sales, you could say that the value proposition to retailers is dubious since they are giving customers discounts on products they were already about to buy.
Legal Eagle is filing a lawsuit against them, which is going to be interesting to see the outcome. I’m Suing Honey .
I heard from a few security podcasts that Microsoft wanted to have exclusive rights to manage the security of the kernel on Windows machines. However, due to the EU’s competition laws, they don’t like monopolies so want an open market of security software. In most cases, competition is good, but this could actually be one area where you do want a closed system. The more companies that have control in something fundamental as the kernel, then the greater risk of threats.
A kernel driver has very intimate access to the system’s most inner workings. If anything goes wrong with the kernel driver; the system must blue screen to prevent further damage to the user settings, files, security and so on.
Crowdstrike released a faulty update in their software update, which caused the infamous blue screen of death in many Windows systems across the globe. Microsoft must have been fuming, because they knew this wouldn’t have happened with a closed system, and the media kept on reporting on it as if it was a Windows problem. Sure, it only affected Windows PCs, but it had nothing to do with Microsoft.
If I understand correctly, the driver was signed off by Microsoft but the update involved a “channel file” which just contained loads of zeros. So when the driver used it, it had no choice but to blue-screen. It makes you wonder what kind of testing processes they have at Crowdstrike if they can release an update like that.
When I logged in at work, our Group IT announced that some colleagues will be affected by a Crowdstrike problem and would be acting quickly to get people back up and running. It was only a bit later when someone sent me a screenshot of some of our users complaining on X did I realise that it wasn’t just an internal problem. When I went on X, I saw reports of the problem affecting banks, airlines, supermarkets and more; and had a live news page on the BBC. I still didn’t understand the severity of the problem until I saw that Troy Hunt had declared it as one of the severest problems we have ever seen.
I don’t think it’s too early to call it: this will be the largest IT outage in history
Despite Group IT making it sound easy to restore, when I heard others talk about it, I got the impression that it was fairly straightforward to revert the update on a single computer, but when you have hundreds of computers; then it is a problem. In companies where they only have a few IT staff; it is crippling. You may think that people could fix the problem themselves but many people aren’t tech-savvy, and plus, many companies lock down access so you don’t have any advanced features like Administrator mode.
Furthermore, it sounded like servers “in the cloud” were even more difficult to restore; or it was more cumbersome at least.
Ironically, in recent years, we have moved a lot of our live infrastructure from our own data centres and into the cloud; citing benefits of reliability. However, this problem meant our users were impacted for a day or so; when we could have got them up and running within an hour or so if the servers were still internally hosted.
Crowdstrike released an update to prevent more machines from being brought down, and had sent customers mitigation steps and tools to identify impacted hosts. The new update wouldn’t fix the broken machines though; that required manual fix involving booting into safe mode, locating the dodgy file, and removing it.
Companies purchase security software to prevent system outages, and causing a global system outage is a massive PR blunder for Crowdstrike and security software in general. It’s gonna be tough rebuilding trust, but many of the every-day people will probably blame Microsoft because that’s the name that was initially stated in the media.
It must have been brutal for the upper management, and a disaster when they turn up fatigued and under pressure on live TV.
The CEO of @crowdstrike chokes on his own words because he knows they are not true.
Troy Hunt documented the story as he learned more:
Something super weird happening right now: just been called by several totally different media outlets in the last few minutes, all with Windows machines suddenly BSoD’ing (Blue Screen of Death). Anyone else seen this? Seems to be entering recovery mode: pic.twitter.com/DxdLyA9BLA
I was looking through some old Twitter bookmarks and found this interesting thread on the running app Strava.
Note: Strava have apparently drastically improved their privacy options and default settings since this discussion. There are options to hide your home and work place using a buffer zone where it won’t track you.
“Out running this morning on a new route and a lady runs past me. Despite only passing, when I get home Strava automatically tags her in my run. If I click on her face it shows her full name, picture and a map of her running route (which effectively shows where she lives). This is despite the fact that I don’t follow her and she doesn’t share her activity publicly. So basically if someone sees a woman running alone there’s an app they can go to see her name, picture and address”
Andrew Seward
Other people pointed out that all visibility settings default to “Everyone” and this feature was called “Flyby” but was not clear that people will be able to see your running route and similar.
Discussion:
When a feature is designed by someone without bad intentions, an idea can sound great on paper but with more thought, can potentially have negative implications. In this case, the feature sounds like a great social aspect, and maybe runners can learn better running routes and compete for the best times. However, it can be used for nefarious purposes:
A stalker can learn where you will be and at what time, and can even determine where the most secluded area will be.
A thief will know when your house could be vacated and how long for.
This doesn’t just apply to running apps, and caution should be used when using all apps. The classic example is not posting on social media about how excited you are for your holiday, and instead: posting about it when you come back. Exposing when you will leave your house is useful for burglars.
Of course, features could have more nefarious purposes. People often accuse Google of collecting data to use for its primary business which basically makes money off your data with its advertising business. These features can often be framed for your own benefit with claims of “personalised experience”.
Often features can be enabled by default which takes advantage of people’s laziness to read the options and turn them off. However, even if you do check the settings, you might not understand what the feature actually is, just like people didn’t fully understand Strava’s “Flyby” feature.
I’ve finished reading The Art of Captivating Conversation by Patrick King. I made notes from the most interesting points and ideas. I’ve always found small-talk to be awkward and the author gives tips on how to make the conversation flow and sound more interesting, and more interested in the other person.
Conversations
Conversations are the threads that weave the fabric of social interaction, and they serve two primary purposes: entertainment and utility. The art of conversation lies in the delicate balance between these two elements, ensuring that our interactions are both enjoyable and productive.
At the heart of our interactions are the six primary emotions: happiness, sadness, fear, anger, surprise, and disgust. These emotions are universal and often drive the direction and tone of our conversations. Recognizing and responding to these emotions in others can lead to more meaningful and empathetic communication.
Small talk
Small talk plays a crucial role in initiating conversations and building rapport. Common small talk questions include inquiries about one’s day, weekend, work, family, and plans. Small talk, often seen as a necessary evil, is widely disliked for its superficial nature. It’s a societal construct designed to convey politeness, yet it often feels insincere. The key to transcending small talk lies in personalising the conversation with genuine interest and shared stories.
To engage effectively in small talk, one should aim to provide entertainment, make the other person feel good, and offer substantial content that allows the conversation to flow with minimal effort. This can be achieved through two methods:
1. Answering a fuzzy version of the question: This involves focusing on a keyword from the question and expanding on it with a more interesting or entertaining anecdote. For example, if asked about the weekend, one might share a memorable weekend experience from the past rather than a mundane recount of the past days.
2. Completely redirecting the conversation: By briefly acknowledging the question and then pivoting to a more engaging topic, one can steer the conversation away from generic small talk. Using transitional phrases like “it was good, but did you hear about…” can quickly shift the focus to something of mutual interest.
What Would Jay Leno Do?
“You can make more friends in two months by becoming truly interested in other people than you can in two years by trying to get other people interested in you.”
Dale Carnegie
When people sense you care, they respond in kind and open up. The best way to articulate this is to picture your favourite talk show host. The guest is the centre of his world for the next ten minutes. His genuine curiosity, enthusiastic reactions, and positive demeanour not only make his guests feel valued but also entertain and engage his audience. This approach is highlighted as a model for personal interactions, where showing real interest in others can lead to more meaningful and reciprocal relationships.
Everyone has unique knowledge and experiences. By being curious about others, we acknowledge that every person we meet can teach us something new, thereby enriching our own lives. This mindset encourages a sense of humility and openness to learning from others.
Be aware of social narcissism, where conversations are dominated by one’s own interests, disregarding the value of others’ experiences. This behaviour is characterised by listening only to respond rather than to understand, and it hinders the development of genuine connections.
Break The Ice
Social interactions, especially in settings such as networking events or parties, can often feel like navigating a minefield. The challenge of breaking into a conversation group can seem daunting, as if invisible barriers are erected around them. Common internal objections include the fear of interrupting, appearing awkward, or being perceived as strange.
However, the key to overcoming these social hurdles lies in establishing a “Social Goal.” This goal acts as a beacon, overriding any social defence mechanisms. It could be as specific as learning about an individual, collecting a set of business cards, or memorising names at a gathering.
To facilitate this process, icebreakers can be invaluable. They can be categorised into three types:
1. Subjective Queries: These involve asking for personal opinions on topics of mutual interest, such as the music at a party. It’s a way to show curiosity and invite others to share their passions.
2. Objective Inquiries: These are questions about factual information, like the time, directions to the nearest café, or the location of the host. Such questions are non-threatening and serve as a natural entry point into a conversation.
3. Comments on Shared Reality: Observations about the immediate environment or universally acknowledged truths can also serve as icebreakers. By expressing an opinion on something already within the other person’s awareness, it opens up the floor for a shared discussion.
Interestingly, it’s perfectly acceptable to ask questions to which you already know the answers. The primary aim is not to seek information but to initiate interaction and establish a connection.
In essence, breaking the ice is less about the content of the conversation and more about the willingness to engage. Remember, the objective is to engage, not to impress. With practice, the art of conversation becomes less of a challenge and more of a rewarding journey.
Never Laugh First
Initiating laughter in a conversation might inadvertently pressure others to conform to your emotional state, potentially creating discomfort. Moreover, it hinders your ability to assess the genuine humour of your remarks.
Belief Police
We feel that since we know so much better than the other person, we have some sort of responsibility to correct them. We then take it upon ourselves to prove to them just how smart we are. We can’t stand someone believing something wrong to what we believe. This habit is obnoxious to talk to.
Questions
When you ask a general question, you will get a general answer. Questions like “what do you do for fun?” are hard to answer because no one thinks about their life in such broad terms. You want to enable people to be lazy and open ended questions actually make us think quite a bit and inject lulls into the conversation. “What is your favourite movie of all time?” This is hard because it wants one single answer and to represent you in a positive light. It can be hard to think of a single movie. A better question is “what’s a good movie you have seen recently?”. You can easily recall a movie you have seen recently and it doesn’t have to be the best. So the advice is to put boundaries and qualifiers on your question to make it less specific. You can even provide answers/prompts, so “what do you do for fun?” can be prompted with “playing sports, go outdoors, or music”.
Take The Hint
Recognizing cues of disinterest, such as a lack of engagement, prolonged silences, or shifting to generic topics, is crucial in respecting the other person’s boundaries and maintaining a comfortable conversation flow.
Eye Contact
Balancing eye contact is key; too much can be as disconcerting as too little. A general guideline is to maintain eye contact 80% of the time when listening and 50% when speaking to foster a sense of ease and attentiveness.
HPM, SBR, & EDR
HPM emphasises the use of personal experiences (History), personal opinions (Philosophy), and associative thinking (Metaphor) to engage in a conversation.
SBR is a method of guiding a conversation by asking questions. ‘Specific‘ questions delve into the details of a topic, ‘Broad‘ questions open up new avenues for discussion, and ‘Related‘ questions tie in relevant but potentially separate ideas, allowing the conversation to flow naturally and informatively.
EDR focuses on emotional intelligence, asking for specifics, and confirming understanding. By acknowledging emotions (Emotion), probing for more information (Detail), and paraphrasing what has been said (Restatements), a person can demonstrate empathy, interest, and attentiveness, which are crucial for meaningful interactions.
Together, these strategies provide a comprehensive framework for effective communication, whether in casual conversations or more formal discussions. They encourage a deeper connection between individuals by fostering an environment where personal stories, emotions, and details are valued and explored.
Storytelling
1. Detail-Oriented Approach: Instead of crafting a full narrative, focus on providing five distinct, specific details. These serve as hooks, leading the listener from one piece of information to another, creating a chain of engaging tidbits.
2. Emotion-Driven Narrative: Concentrate on encapsulating a single motion or emotion in one sentence. Stories should evoke emotional responses, such as happiness, empathy, surprise, or curiosity.
Breaking into banter
Use light misunderstandings, double entendres, puns, and comical confusion to break the ice and introduce humour into the conversation.
Flow
Avoid stagnation by shifting the conversation to related topics, delving deeper into subjects, sharing personal experiences, inquiring about favourites, discussing emotions, expressing nuanced opinions, posing hypothetical questions, or referencing friends and articles.
Conversation Threading
This technique enhances your ability to respond quickly and thoughtfully in conversations. As a listener, use the storytelling method to pick up on topics and steer the conversation in a direction that interests you. For instance, if skiing is mentioned but holds no interest for you, pivot the discussion to talk about mountains or related experiences.
By employing these methods, you can transform simple exchanges into memorable conversations that resonate with those involved. Whether you’re a storyteller or a keen listener, the key is to keep the conversation moving, engaging, and full of life. Remember, the goal is not just to talk but to connect.
I’ve read about, or watched videos on computer game balance and find it such an interesting topic. How you can measure and perceive the strength of each character/unit, or attempt to fix the issue to rebalance the game.
Second Wind have made a video on Teamflight Tactics.
I’ve never played this game, or even similar games, but it has the same general problems to solve in its design that many games do.
So taking the transcript, and running it through AI, I’ve made a good blog on it.
Teamfight Tactics
Teamfight Tactics (TFT) by Riot Games is a strategic auto-battler, inspired by the League of Legends universe and drawing elements from Dota Auto Chess. In this competitive online game, players are pitted against seven adversaries, each vying to construct a dominant team that outlasts the rest.
In a game like League of Legends, a single overpowered champion can only be selected by one player and would be banned in competitions once discovered. In TFT, all Champions and items are available all at once creating many possibilities for players to find exploits in.
Balancing the dynamic of Teamfight Tactics (TFT) is a compelling challenge. Comparing it to card games like Hearthstone, where adjustments are made through a limited set of variables, TFT presents a stark contrast with its myriad of factors such as health, armour, animation speed to name a few.
Initially, it might seem that having numerous variables at one’s disposal would simplify the balancing process. Even minor adjustments can significantly influence the game’s equilibrium. For instance, a mere 0.25-second reduction in a character’s animation speed can transform an underperforming champion into an overwhelmingly dominant force.
The sensitivity of each variable is due to the intricate interconnections within the game. A single element that is either too weak or too strong, regardless of potential counters, can trigger a cascade of effects that alter the entire gameplay experience.
Consider the analogy of a card game where an overpowered card exists. In such a scenario, there are usually counters or alternative strategies to mitigate its impact. However, if a card is deemed too weak, it’s simply excluded from a player’s deck without much consequence. Contrast this with a game like Teamfight Tactics, where the strength of a champion is intrinsically linked to its traits and the overall synergy within a team composition. If a champion is underpowered, it doesn’t just affect the viability of that single unit; it extends to the entire trait group, potentially diminishing the strength of related champions. This interconnectedness presents a challenging balance but manageable through data analysis. Player perceptions of balance are shaped by this data.
Vladimir The Placebo, and Vain the Unappreciated
The character Vladimir in League of Legends had become notably powerful, overshadowing others in the game’s “meta”. To address this, developers proposed minor tweaks to balance his abilities. However, when the update was released, Vladimir’s dedicated players were outraged, believing their favourite character had been weakened to the point of being nonviable. But, in an unexpected turn of events, the nerf was never actually implemented due to an oversight. The players’ reactions were solely based on the anticipated changes they read about, not on any real modification to Vladimir’s capabilities. This psychological effect influenced Vladimir users to play more cautiously, while their opponents became more bold, illustrating how perception can shape reality.
Data only reflects the current state, not the potential. Particularly in a strategy game like Team Fight Tactics, which is complex and “unsolved”, players’ understanding and use of characters can be heavily swayed by their perceptions. Perception often becomes the player’s reality.
In the fifth instalment of the game, there emerged a low-cost champion named Vain. Initially, after the game’s release, the consensus was that Vain was underperforming—deemed the least desirable among her tier. The development team had reservations; they believed she wasn’t as ineffective as portrayed. Consequently, a minor enhancement was scheduled for Vain. However, before the update could go live, feedback from players in China indicated they had discovered a potent strategy for Vain. This revelation transformed her status drastically within three days, elevating her from the least favoured to potentially one of the most overpowering champions ever introduced.
This scenario underscores the limitations of relying solely on data, whether from players or developers, as it may not reveal the full picture. Balancing in gaming is often perceived in black and white terms by the player base—they view a character as either strong or weak, which leads to calls for nerfs or buffs. However, they frequently overlook the subtle intricacies and minute adjustments that can have significant impacts on gameplay.
Different Players
In competitive games like League of Legends, different balance parameters are set for various levels of play. A character might dominate in lower ranks but may not be as effective in higher tiers of play.
When it comes to balancing games like Teamfight Tactics, developers have taken an approach by balancing the game as if computers were playing it. The game is designed to test strategic thinking rather than reflexes and mechanical skill.
In Army A versus Army B, the outcome is predetermined. However, this does not mean we should nerf an army simply because it performs well at a lower skill level. Instead, it presents a learning opportunity for players to improve their skills.
Interestingly, perceived imbalances can serve as educational tools. As players engage with the game, they gain knowledge through experimentation. For example, if a player tries a certain composition with specific items and it fails, they can reflect on whether it was a misstep or an unforeseen event. Learning that a champion doesn’t synergize well with a particular item is valuable knowledge to carry into future games.
There are build combinations that could potentially disrupt the game’s balance if the perfect mix is achieved. This aspect works well in single-player modes like Roguelikes, where the aim is to become overwhelmingly powerful. However, the challenge arises in maintaining this sense of excitement while ensuring these powerful builds don’t lead to exploitation in a multiplayer setting.
Risks & Rewards
Balancing isn’t merely about pitting one army against another to see the outcome. It’s also about the risks involved in reaching that point. For instance, if there’s a build that appears once in every 10,000 games, requiring a perfect alignment of circumstances, it’s only fair that such a build is more potent than one that’s easily attainable in every game. Therefore, in games like TFT, balancing involves weighing the relative power against the rarity of acquisition, ensuring that when a player encounters a significantly rare build, it feels justified because of the risks taken or the innovative strategies employed.
TFT thrives on the abundance of possible outcomes, with a multitude of combinations and variables at play. It’s crucial for these games to offer not just a handful of ‘high roll’ moments but a wide array, potentially hundreds, allowing for diverse gameplay experiences. TFT reaches its pinnacle when players are presented with numerous potential strategies and must adapt their approach based on the augments, items, and champions they encounter in a given game, crafting their path to victory with the resources at hand.
New Content Updates
The allure of both playing and developing this game lies in its inherent unpredictability. Each session is a unique experience, a stark contrast to many Roguelike games that, despite their initial promise of variety, tend to become predictable after extensive play. Teamfight Tactics, however, stands out with its vast array of possible combinations. Just when you think you’ve seen it all, a new set is introduced, refreshing the game entirely. This happens every four months, an impressive feat that adds a fresh roster of champions, traits, and augments.
The question arises: how is it possible to introduce such a significant amount of content regularly while maintaining balance and preventing the randomness from skewing too far towards being either underwhelming or overpowering? The answer lies in ‘Randomness Distribution Systems’. These systems are designed to control the frequency and type of experiences players encounter. As a game designer, the instinct might be to embrace randomness in its purest form, but the key is to harness it. By setting minimum and maximum thresholds for experiences, we ensure that all elements of randomness fall within these bounds, creating a balanced and engaging game environment.
In Mario Party, have you ever noticed that you never seem to roll the same number on the dice four times consecutively? This isn’t a coincidence; it’s actually by design. Nintendo has implemented a system of controlled randomness to prevent such repetition, as it could lead to a frustrating gaming experience.
This concept is akin to a crafted ‘Ludo-narrative’, where game designers aim to shape player experiences through seemingly random events, but with a controlled distribution to keep the gameplay enjoyable and engaging. The goal is to allow players to encounter extreme situations, but these are skewed towards positive outcomes rather than negative ones.
This scenario might distort the essence of randomness, but surprisingly, players may not voice their dissatisfaction. Despite the statistical improbability, with millions of players engaging in a game daily, someone is bound to encounter this experience. Even odds as low as 1 in 10,000 can impact thousands of players at scale, highlighting the importance of considering player frustration as a crucial aspect of the gaming experience.
Perfectly Balanced
When discussing game balance, it’s not just about whether a feature is frustrating; it’s about recognising that frustration indicates a flaw in the design that needs to be addressed and learned from. Game balance is a complex, ever-evolving challenge that developers continuously tweak, hoping to align with player expectations. However, there will always be criticism, no matter the adjustments made.
The perception of balance is significant, and within any gaming community, you’ll find voices claiming that perfectly balanced video games don’t exist. Some players set such lofty standards for balance that they seem nearly impossible to meet. The key is establishing a solid foundation that dictates how the game should unfold, ensuring that the core gameplay aligns with the intended player experience.
In Teamfight Tactics, the ideal duration for rounds is targeted to be between 18 and 25 seconds, which is considered the standard for a well-paced battle. By setting these benchmarks, developers can align the game’s balance with this envisioned state and is key to achieving a finely-tuned game.
Conclusion
It’s essential to have a clear, balanced vision for the game and to persistently follow through with it. Balancing a game is a complex and dynamic challenge, not merely a matter of adjusting to data but also managing player perceptions and their experiences of frustration. Navigating this ever-changing landscape is no easy feat, especially when the development team must juggle multiple roles at a rapid pace. However, it’s precisely this complexity that adds to the excitement and enjoyment of Teamfight Tactics.
I always hate talking on phones and I always think that some companies’ policy to “auto renew unless you phone up to cancel” takes advantage of that mindset. My Home Insurance is with Shiela’s Wheels and they auto-renewed last time at an increased cost (even though I would have another year “no claims” bonus so would expect a discount).
It was approaching the date of renewal, and I thought I probably needed to call them to cancel. However, I received a letter
“Due to our renewal criteria, we’re unable to renew your policy”.
No explanation given. Very weird.
I go on their website, and my account shows that it is set to auto renew. There was a message saying that it will auto-renew, and there should have been a link to see my new quote – but the link was disabled.
So is it set to renew or not?
I used their live webchat, and after “checking my account” for 5 mins they confirmed it wasn’t set to auto renew. So I told them that it shows as auto-renew on my account page. They then disabled it for me. I thought it was weird that they were so happy to disable and not try and keep me for another year. Don’t they want my business? I then ask them why I cannot renew, since I still am unaware of what the problem was.
Thanks for looking to renew with us, it’s great to hear you want to stay with us for another year. We won’t be able to renew your policy this year. This is due to an upgrade of our internal system and we’re sorry that this has impacted you. You can visit a price comparison website to get a new policy quote. Your cover details and how much you paid this year are available in your insurance schedule in your Account to help you create a like-for-like quote and compare your price. You can also be assured that a new esure quote will not be higher than any renewal quote we would have offered you at this time.Thanks again for choosing esure. We can’t wait to see you return.
How bonkers is that? They cannot renew existing customers in their new system, and are confident that if I go to a price comparison website, then their prices should be competitive so I could come back. Surely they have to pay a commision to the price comparison websites, and there’s a good chance I won’t come back.
As it goes, I went to a price comparison website and didn’t even see Shiela’s Wheels/Esure on there, so they have lost me as a customer.
Recently, I have been making jokes with my colleagues about how bad we write our “User Stories”. I joked about some user stories for Shiela’s Wheels new computer system:
As an existing customer, I don't want my policy to be renewed because the system has been upgraded
As an existing customer when I ask to renew I want to be told to take my business elsewhere
I’ve also been playing around with AI (Bing Copilot) quite a lot recently and keep testing it out.
I gave it the instruction:
“I contacted my Home Insurance company about why I couldn’t renew with them. Their response was <insert quote from above>. Write about how ridiculous it is that upgrading a system means that they are unable to renew their policy.”
Funny – Blog Post – Long
In the whimsical world of insurance, where logic often takes a backseat to the mysterious workings of "system upgrades," we find ourselves in a delightful conundrum. Picture this: you're cozied up with your favorite insurance policy, dreaming of another year of uneventful coverage, when suddenly – bam! – you're hit with the "it's not you, it's our internal system" breakup line.
It's almost comedic, isn't it? The idea that a company, entrusted with the oh-so-serious business of insuring our worldly possessions, can't figure out how to keep a customer due to an upgrade. What are they upgrading to – a system that only accepts carrier pigeons? Are they swapping out their computers for abacuses? One can only imagine the boardroom conversation: "Folks, we've got two options – renew these policies, or play with our shiny new system. I say we go for the shiny!"
Let's not forget the helpful suggestion to visit a price comparison website. It's as if they're saying, "We've enjoyed taking your money, but why don't you go see if someone else wants a turn?" And the assurance that a new quote won't be higher than the renewal quote they would have offered is the cherry on top of this farcical sundae. It's like a restaurant saying, "We can't serve you dinner tonight, but rest assured, if we did, it wouldn't have been more expensive than last night's meal."
The silver lining? This situation provides a perfect opportunity for a humorous blog post or a stand-up comedy bit. Imagine the laughs you could get with lines like, "I tried to renew my insurance policy, but my company was too busy updating their system to take my money. I guess I'll just wrap my house in bubble wrap and hope for the best!"
In the end, while the situation may be frustrating, it's also a reminder that sometimes, life throws you a curveball that's so absurd, you can't help but laugh. And who knows, maybe that laughter is the best policy of all. So here's to system upgrades and the unexpected comedy they bring into our lives – may they always be as entertaining as they are inconvenient.
Stranger Coding Tings 