Also worth noting... Facebook doesn’t produce a product for consumers. They produce a platform where the consumers are the product. Their platform (the thing they provide) is empty of content in a way that a contained narratives simply can’t be.

I mean.., don’t get me wrong... if your really really great (and probably…

I’m sure people, including those in charge at Facebook, are capable of having more than one motive at a time.

There’s no proof that people are unable to enjoy art based on race.

People, for better or worse, identify with people that look like them and live lives that resemble their own. That is an argument made within virtually all of the minority communities for why there should be more and better representation in media for their group. This reality frequently sets up zero-sum…

The tyranny of market demographics.

Isn’t this kind of problematic... given that all the other characters are anthropomorphic animals?

I’m just a bit baffled that they didn’t just ignore the comments. Isn’t this standard (constitutionally valid) operating procedure?

Look, white people, this comes with the territory. If a massive number of Black people show up at a protest, at least one person is gonna yell “fuck the police,”

Yeah, but haven’t you heard that inaction is a form of violence? You must take action or you are part of the problem.

I don’t know what he was arguing, in particular, but there is a very serious conflict surrounding the incompatibility between consent and consumption of mind altering substances. I mean... pointing out a few simple (seemingly irrefutable) facts about reality can really get folks defensive on the internet.

What is your point here, though? That I’m just being too positive, by defending material that has been presented to us?

My point, as I said in my original post, is that we’re left to choose how we interpret this sort of thing... because the operative variable (the intent of the people that created the ad) is not actuall…

a) We’re writing in a comment board, we’re not exactly impacting Ubisoft with our remarks here.

Of course; I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

It’s an argument in favor of choosing a perspective of grace (good will) when there is no specific evidence of which motive is dominant.

Yeah, but what is true on average tells you very little about what is true in each individual case. The specifics matter... including the specifics we have an impulse to assume.

In what way? A cynical assumption of their cynicism seems to serve no good end.

I mean.... I don’t want people to be naive... be aware of what is possible (including the bad stuff)... but this impulse to cynicism, before all else, seems kinda rotten.

When you consider that trailers—cinematic ones, especially—are marketing materials in their purest form, meant to drum up anticipation for an expensive product, there’s an unmistakable smack of cynicism at play here.

The 2080 Super is currently a $750 card. I guess your point is mostly preserved even with the correction, but it is somewhat unusual to see well optimized console ports and it’s certainly good to be reminded that DLSS has improved dramatically since the RTX launch.

That pricing is apparently going to change soon.…

The game was developed in a particular context (when there were a lot of interest in the surveillance state in the UK) and, as with all the other WatchDogs games, it extrapolated a caricature of reality out in to the future. It’s not hard to place intrusive surveillance on the same continuum as police violence (as…

That... or mission successful on the part of the state. Nothing to see here. :P