• Skua@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      ·
      8 months ago

      They remastered the 2004/2005 Pandemic ones and apparently did a fucking terrible job of it

      • secret300@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        Did they really? I just looked it up and it looks exactly the same… It seems like it’s just a rerelease but like why? Weren’t there still people playing the original battlefront 2 with mods and shit?

        • Skua@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          8 months ago

          I could totally see why there would be a market for it with updated online functionality, a graphical refresh, and a balance pass. The games are still really fun, but their age does make it a little bit of a hassle to play them compared to more modern counterparts. They could also have added a few things like making galactic conquest mode playable online, and maybe some mod management, for example. I’d have been pretty tempted by that. Unfortunately what they did instead seems to have been steal some stuff from a modder and bugger all else

          • secret300@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yeah I’d love that. I honestly still play the PS2 version from time to time just to play galactic conquest

        • all-knight-party@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          It’s not a remaster. It’s just a repackaging and rerelease. As per usual with Aspyr’s work they did the bare minimum, if you can even consider it that

    • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It was a horrid mess of a lazy release, also stole content from modders.

      I’m sure they’ll use this to say people don’t want to buy old games rather than admit they did a shit job and wanted to make bank for it.

      The Darkforces remaster looks to be amazing though. I’ll be picking that up at some stage, can’t justify a $43 price tag for a 30 year old title so I’ll wait for a sale.

        • KingJalopy @lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          8 months ago

          What is this link in your posts? I’m reading the site but I don’t understand what it is really.

          • Pennomi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            58
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s a stupid trend where people think they are somehow liberating their comments from being used in training by AI.

            Spoiler alert, it doesn’t work. And even if it did, no one actually cares about your comment about (checks thread) people NOT playing a video game.

                • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’m not the OP, but I don’t feel like it would affect the process of harvesting your data or put some burden on the company doing it, since they have big bucks. But at the same time I’m not against it for it can lead to many humorous examples of AI putting this license after it’s replies after learning on your content. It would be the platinum tier absurdity and I’m all for it.

                • FaceDeer@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  It’s superstitious clutter. Most websites require you to license the content you post to them without those restrictions, and AI training may not even involve copyright in the first place, meaning the license is moot. It just makes you look silly.

              • Pennomi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                I just think it’s silly that people think it actually works.

                Besides, if AI really is powerful enough to make a splash in the world, wouldn’t you WANT it to contain your data? That would make it more favorable to your viewpoints.

                • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  I just think it’s silly that people think it actually works.

                  Are you a lawyer? Are you familiar with the Creative Commons license?

                  If not, please feel free to get back to us after you get your degree, and let us all know what the final word is on this.

                  Besides, if AI really is powerful enough to make a splash in the world, wouldn’t you WANT it to contain your data?

                  Oh I would love that, if they paid me to use my content, under terms that I would agree for it to be used (betterment of Humankind, etc.).

                  Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            The equivalent of this but for nerds and it’s just as effective

            Hell, they can’t even be bothered to self host so they can at least pretend to have some kind of ownership over what they share on Lemmy and they admit to not having any plan to actually check if their data is used by AI companies, that’s how ridiculous this is.

          • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            19
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            What is this link in your posts? I’m reading the site but I don’t understand what it is really.

            I’m licensing my comments with a Creative Commons license, so that if anyone wants to use them to train their AI models/bots with, they have to at the very least give citation to that.

            I’m hoping it’s a way of deterring bot activity on my comments. It’s something that I saw someone else doing, so I decided to emulate it, since it’s just a simple copy and paste, and if it works, it’s worth the momentary paste.

            Plus it’s really interesting that its gotten a lot of positive and negative feedback. Some people really get bent out of shape seeing it being there, and others just have a natural curiosity about it. So it’s kind of interesting to see that as well, just by using it.

            Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

              • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                12
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                How are you going to prove your data was used?

                Honestly, I wasn’t going to worry about that, I’m just doing a quick copy and paste, and moving on. If it works, it works.

                I’m making the assumption that any AI model building developer who sees the license notation would honor the the Creative Commons license. We software developers usually care about those things, especially the open source style protecting ones.

                Otherwise I will just wait for years from now when Congress creates new disclosure legislation. Companies are already starting to get pissed off at each other about who’s paying who, and who’s using what content to program their AI models with, and they find out who those other people are that is using their content. I’m pretty sure lobbying efforts are on going right now, and legislation will come out soon enough.

                After that legislation exists, I can go back to all my comments and sue the companies, once those AI model building companies have to disclose their data source. I’m retired, I have time on my hands.

                Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)

                • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  You’re just like boomers on Facebook copy pasting a comment on their wall to say that Meta can’t monetize their data.

                  If AI is trained on Lemmy content it will just scrub the site, convert it to raw text, chew the data and use it to spit out answers to stupid questions, your link will change fuck dick to that and even you are admitting that you don’t intend to do anything about it.

                  The only way to make sure AI isn’t trained on what you’re writing is to have a journal that you share with no one.