Sonic is basically what got me invested in voice actor swaps lol. I literally can't stand some of the voice actor swaps in that series because they just sound so drastically different and wrong.

Voice issues happen a lot with anime too when it gets dubbed. Rarely will the dub be better, but there's some iconic dubs like the pokemon cast, or haruhi. With the yuki-chan spin-off series of haruhi, I was really concerned they'd get different VAs and it'd be ruined as a result, but fortunately they had brought back the entire original cast.

I'm pretty picky about voices of iconic characters, but the new guy doing Mario and Luigi is solid. He sounds just like them to me, so no problem.

They should just get rid of the expectations of sales numbers like what current AAA get. If we want better games, less people will buy them, because a good game isn't for everyone.

I buy games that release for $40 and $50. They don't have dlc. They don't have microtransactions. They don't have cash shops. They don't have battle passes. I just pay my $40/$50, get my physical copy, often with a bundled goodie like cards or keychains, and play and enjoy my 40hr game.

It's absolutely possible because the companies that release these titles are pumping out several per year. You just… have to stop spec racing and obsessing over 200hr playtimes and top of the line graphics and actually focus on making a decent, mid-sized game, with realistic expectations.

I pretty much exclusively buy AA at this point, with the rare AAA nintendo 1st party title that I'm happy to pay $60 for. Most AAA games though just aren't worth it. Some of those games coming out you couldn't pay me to play.

They're right that retail prices of AAA games are too low to make a profit. Which is why they've turned to microtransactions and dlc. However, the price of such games is too high, which means the budgets and profit expectations are too high. With the quality of games coming out lately, even $60 is too high. I can't imagine spending $70 or even $80 on a game.

playstation started declining with ps3 which released in 2006. PS4 released in 2013, a decade ago. PS4 wasn't worth buying. That's a decade of garbage from sony.

God, finally. Maybe playstation will get better now? They've been declining in quality for literally ages.

Docked my grades for literally no reason other than that he didn’t like me. I always got perfect scores in school, got a B in his class simply because he didn’t like me. Parents had to make a huge fuss about it which lead to the grade being corrected.

Every time I see something about tinder it’s just worse and worse. why would I want to use it?

If you’re going through a music label then ask the company you’re working with. They absolutely get paid per view (as per the pre-roll ads) if you aren’t managing the uploads yourself. But what they pay you may be different depending on what they’re doing.

Youtube content creators get paid via a few different methods:

1. Pre-roll and mid-roll ads. This is youtube’s actual and intended monetization method. These are ads that play that are separate from the video and are personalized per-user. They often have a “skip” button you can click after a few seconds. Youtube pays creators per view for these ads. You should check youtube’s monetization section on the channel settings to set this all up.

2. Sponsors. These are baked into the video where the content creator usually goes something like “Yeah I enjoy my switch, but do you know what I like more? raid shadow legends!” These are one-time payments made prior to the video’s release, and are not paid per view. The view count on the video and whether or not people are actually watching the sponsored section is irrelevant.

3. Patreon and other patreon-like services. These are entirely unrelated to viewcount or ads, and are just people paying monthly on some other site (typically patreon or locals) to help fund the channel.

For music, I’m not sure at all how the youtube music platform works. But afaik youtube music is just youtube videos in a different format, so you’d be going with method #1 with the pre-roll ads.

Typically youtube’s monetization model requires that you actually set things up, and in order to do so you need to meet particular criteria (particular subscriber counts, view counts, etc). I know musicians work with music labels, so that may work differently depending on what’s going on for you. But if you’re specifically managing a youtube channel where you upload videos, then #1 applies and just check the monetization section. I don’t think it’s “by default”.

The custom-made “sponsors” sections that are baked into the video are not paid per view. You can freely skip them without harming the content creator. iirc they get paid per video upload, not per view. it’s only the “live” separate ads that appear prior to the video, mid-roll, etc. that they get paid per view (and would be missing if you block them).

yup, honestly I kinda use it more than kbin/lemmy. kinda hard to find content I’m after here.

There’s a difference between understanding “this isn’t going to be what it looks like, it’ll look like wood” and actually being able to visualize and “see” the wood version in your head prior to completion.

So looking at your grey version, someone with aphantasia (who isn’t a moron) might be like “I can’t visualize/imagine it as wood, could I see what that looks like?”, as in they understand it will be wood, but may have no clue what that actually looks like until it’s in front of them.

What you’re describing just sounds like a run of the mill idiot who also may have aphantasia.

yup. I thought I had aphantasia for a while because of this. Turns out, no. People with aphantasia can’t even do that #2 type. They’re just completely incapable of handling images or 3d scenes in their mind at all.

So I’m firmly in type 2. I can close my eyes and just see black/the back of my eyelids. No matter how hard I try I will never be able to “override” my actual vision. Instead, I have a sort of “mental” model in my brain which can handle imagery and 3d scenes and such, but it’s very different in experience than my actual vision. The two don’t overlap at all for me.

“ghostly” is how I’d describe it, but it’s really a different set of qualia altogether, not a “faint” version of my vision.

But yeah as you mention a few comments here kinda makes it sound like it’s just a matter of practicing visualization (trying to create objects within my actual field of vision, as well as “emphasize” or “focus” on my #2 visualization). I’ll have to spend time seeing if I can practice it…

Both 2 and 3 can mentally manipulate objects in 3D. I have type 2 as I mentioned, but I can do full 3d rotations and such. It’s just a “minds eye” kinda thing and not like i’m actually seeing it with my eyes. That makes it kinda difficult to line up my minds eye comprehension with the actual world I see in front of me. whereas people with prophantasia or that third type, should have no issues lining up their visualization with their actual vision.

Right. “prophantasia” is a word used to refer to that “it’s like you’re actually seeing it”, whereas visualization for me isn’t like that and it’s more like what you described, a sort of mental idea, like I can think of and mentally understand imagery, but it’s not like I’m actually looking at it with my eyes (like when I see things or am in a lucid dream).

It seems some people with visualization do this “minds eye” kinda thing, and the some have that “it’s like you’re seeing” type.

This is what I have. basically not aphantasia (we can still manipulate visual imagery in our brains) but it’s also not prophantasia which is essentially just seeing, but with thoughts.