The industry standard framerate for TV shows and movies is 24 fps. This creates the "movie" feeling that distinguishes a fictional product from a reality TV show like Cops. However, all smart TVs currently come with a feature with various names like "motion smoothing" that creates fake frames to "upscale" movies to 48 fps or 60 fps. This results in a bizarre visual effect that makes everything look closer to real life, so instead of enjoying suspense of disbelief you feel like you're watching a bunch of actors play dress-up in a backyard (which is what they are doing, yes).
Personally I can't stand this, I have no idea what kind of idiotic impulse led to its creation, and I try to turn it off every time I see it (which requires wading around in submenus because there's no industry standard name for it), but at this point I've run into multiple people who don't even seem to detect a difference between 24 and 48 fps. To me this is one of those things that make me question if some individuals are living in a different reality. I can't imagine watching an entire movie that's been "upscaled" to look like a AA-tier in-engine game cutscene.
Scaling anime fight clips to 60 fps and 4K has become a cottage industry on youtube as well. The best you can hope for is that it doesn't hurt the original content too much.
I find that ignorance or indifference to this is tied to a person's tolerance for slop like soap operas or Netflix originals. It's genuinely disturbing.
You have some really weird takes. Some good, some...this.
All movies are subversive propaganda, and they have always been so since the birth of the medium. The first Hollywood directors were propagandists. During the mid 30's hollywood put out an increasing amount of pro war propaganda even though the public was decidedly anti-war. Even to use the example from shadow of intent above, LotR is subversive because it continuously has a theme throughout that one should never use the weapons of the enemy.
Are you talking movies, or the movies and books?
Was Tolkien a subversive, because his works portrayed using the Dark Lord's corruptive evil life-destroying ring as bad?
Is most fiction subversive, because it places moral constraints on the heroes?
Is any moral framework subversive, because it separates good from evil? Where do we stop?
There are some things you shouldn't do, even if your enemy is willing to do them.
Yes. Because the universe does not have a morality. It does not care. The dead are not moral, they are inert matter. Fiction that places constraints on heroes is fantasy, because in reality it is possible for whatever definition you consider to be good to lose. In fact "good" is more likely to lose because of it's inability to adapt and use new or distasteful tools. It is too concerned with "should we" that it clobbered and destroyed before it ever gets past the navel gazing stage.
Everything in reality is presupposed on continued existence. Survival is the ONLY morality that matters. It is the only morality that lines up with the universe because it is effectively a tautology. Those things that exist have the traits to exist. It is part of natural selection and applies to absolutely everything. Take stars for instance. Blue stars have shorter lives, thus there are less of them. Red dwarfs have longer lives and thus are the most plentiful. Cultures which reject outside cultures last until a much larger culture comes along. Cultures which do not reject outsiders cease existing immediately.
The problem comes in where people are conditioned to not act and have horrible reactions to those actions that would increase survival of my tribe. One of those reactions is yours from above: the refusal to use the weapons of your enemy. Things like refusing to use Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, refusing to collectivize, refusing to make abortion mandatory for brown people, refusing to implement eugenics to increase IQ to compete with future AI (obviously not current AI, but if we don't start now it will be too late).
Something completely Nietzschean with a villain-protagonist redefining "morality" altogether would be interesting for sure. Bioshock could've been a perfect experience in this vein but they dropped the ball with the retarded good-evil ending.
He's not wrong. What were the last three good original IPs? Palworld and...?
He said "If they watch movies, they are an NPC."
It wasn't about games, and it didn't say "modern." It's not about how good things currently are. He's saying if you watch a movie you're an NPC. That's retarded.
But, yeah, Palworld rocks. I can't stop playing.
Ah, that was me mentally filling in the "after 2015 or so". When did everything become brown, gay, #girlboss slop? Was already on the rise by the time of Last Jedi but that was the most noticeable.
Yeah, you won't find me arguing with that. A lot of entertainment has been ass for decades, but "watching movies" is not inherently NPC behavior.