I mean I've tried DLSS5 on a bunch of games in my library. On most of them, it tanks my framerates and sometimes looks like absolute ass. But in two of my games (Cyberpunk 2077 and Stellar Blade) it looks and runs incredibly, and it's hard not to see the potential.
As far as everything else you've said I 100% agree. It's just not there yet, I think one day it will be though. I'm lucky I got my 5070 right before the prices started getting jacked up, so I'm privileged to be able to experiment with what's already out. And believe me when I say the results vary - at the moment. Even as a fan of the tech and I can confidently say it's not ready. And yes, studios that cram it as a staple feature in place of good optimization and, quite simply, a good game, then they're gonna fail because they released slop. But that's not the destiny of every game that uses it. I'm telling you, one day this tech is gonna be in mass produced hand-held devices. At the current rate of Nvidia GPU prices, they're not gonna be the ones mass producing it and winning. Only a matter of time till China comes out with a 32gb Vram, Blackwell tech x4 GPU for like $200, meanwhile the 16gb equivalents today will cost under $100. Because Nvidia (while I admit they do produce cool tech) are greedy capitalist bastards. All the AI slop companies are greedy capitalist bastards. And I continue to blame the capitalist bastardary more than I do the shortcuts AI unlocks. If the economy wasn't so shit and things in general were more affordable, and one of these GPUs were affordable after a few months of saving like things were 20 years ago, we'd be much happier with this. However we're overall unhappy with it because it's not being developed for affordable entertainment, but instead being used for surveillance powered by datacenters that destroy our environment so a handful of lizards can make billions, while we're literally struggling to afford groceries. I want to burn down those remote, gated billionaire communities and replace THEM with datacenters for OUR general use.
characters look worse, like AI slop filters were added over their faces and bodies
In many cases that's true, but not in all cases. Makes sense considering that no games have had this technology to be used in their art direction, no wonder it looks like ass. If your only citation for this take is that one Resident Evil screenshot that made headlines then I suggest you look at the world deeper than just headlines and clickbait engagement farming articles.
creative vision of the people making the game is bastardized behind these “enhancements” altering the look and feel of the game.
I guess all these mods that revamp textures or do ENB shaders or lighting adjustments are "bastardizing" the creative vision too. I would argue that even running a game on low-medium settings for the sake of framerate is bastardizing the creative vision, as artists worked very hard to produce high quality assets meant to be seen in it's highest fidelity. Do you consider running games on lower graphics settings a bastardization? Didn't think so.
higher bar for entry for performance requirements and still getting poor performance if you do bite the bullet for a more expensive setup
Again, same with every new generation of graphics tech. It's always a higher entry for performance, it's always in the hands of the few first, and poor performance is also, again, not the fault of AI but bad optimization.
a lot of these games aren’t that good, don’t get me wrong a few are, but having to buy extra equipment and push your PC to get marginally better graphics to play an “okay” game isn’t gonna make people jump for joy.
There have always been games that are shit but pushed for graphics, in damn near every console generation since PS2. It's a unique selling point to have shiny graphics. The good games that last on good gameplay and good optimization for good performance are lauded, and for good reason. AI won't change that, if anything make even cooler stuff like HL2 did with it's latest tech. You know what does make shitty games? Situations such as "Studio with best selling game lays off 40% of its developers." And before you say "But they're doing that because AI," again AAA studios have always been doing that since way before, in other industries too, since Thomas Edison. All the EA and Ubisoft controversy? Way before AI. The problem is capitalism, and execs at the top making a buck at the expense of good quality products with planned obsolescence and cheaping out their workers. This is a problem in every industry, AI or not. But these stupid companies that are investing entirely into AI at the expense of good art, writing, and gameplay (whether it uses AI or not) will always fail because it's slop. It's the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory "Machines stole my toothpaste job" stuff, old man yelling at cloud behaviour. It's the exact same logic that blames immigrants for stealing our jobs, without even looking at the bosses who are firing workers and replacing them with exploited immigrants. Is the problem immigration or over exploitation? I view things more towards the latter.
I love AI for what it could be, but we're not ready for it under capitalism. Cognitive offload is only a concern for people who don't respect learning and understanding to begin with, which under capitalism most people don't, being stupid and thoughtless gets you rich these days. I say get them out in the open, let them fail, they deserve it. Smart people don't fall for it. Capitalism is using AI to destroy itself for short-term gains and it's happening right before our eyes - "Capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with," and all that.
But that's my point, people are complaining about elevators because there's perfectly good stairs. I bet people did say that about elevators, calling them death traps and such, when the early implementations were less safe or less quality. My point is it's the same with AI, people are afraid of this new cutting edge technology that our current capitalist society can't handle.
What does it represent to you? Once upon a time the idea of robots or machinery doing all our work for us, it was a dream. Only under capitalism is that a bad thing, because then people won't be forced to work for unedible money. AI could be a great thing. Under capitalism though, it represents something potentially terrible.
Tell me something, if AI technology applied to protein folds helps us discover a cure for cancer or alzheimers, would you refuse the treatment "because it's AI"? Then apply that to any other technological shortcut that created our modern medicine, like MRIs and CT scans or EKG's. Are those great technologies, or "a ton of lost jobs that humans could have done"? "CT scans are bad because it requires less brain surgeons," or "EKG's are bad because a human could be doing those measurements but have been cheaped out by technology." "What about the cognitive offloading from pocket calculators?" (A real argument made at the time, btw.) Did you know that in Victorian times it was someones job to walk down the streets ringing a bell to wake people up in the morning? People were paid to knock on peoples windows so that they could wake up at a certain time. Are you mad at alarm clocks for taking their jobs? How is AI any different but just on a bigger scale? What are the problems that AI implementation and shortcuts that DOESN'T have to do with relying on a paycheck to live? Is relying on a paycheck to live the only way a society can function? Or does capitalism depend on that, and anything that shakes that is potentially dangerous to our capitalist-centric society?
Capitalism can't handle AI. That's not AIs fault, that's capitalisms shortcomings and inherent unsustainability. Everything wrong with AI is just capitalism, I have yet to see evidence prove me otherwise.
I've been a fan of the most cutting edge videogame graphics since that Half Life 2 E3 demonstration in 2002. Didn't hear anyone complaining about better graphics for less performance at that time. The ragdoll physics, the water reflections, the smart new NPC AI, got people hyped to buy the latest 256mb or 512mb GPUs that were expensive at the time. Hell I remember when the PS2 showcase knocked everyones socks off.
Know what I didn't hear? "Ragdoll physics is destroying gaming. The real way would be to pay a village of animators to do keyframe animations of every possible way a character can fall over, instead they use this tool as an excuse to cut back on animators. This is an affront to devs artistic vision and a slap in the face to animators who are now out of potential work." I didn't see these complaints when Nvidia release DX9, DX10, or DX11, that all required the latest GPUs of the time and slowed down framerates on the "more affordable" GPUs. Doom 3 ran like shit on my 128mb Geforce 3. Except now that this has an association to AI, people are being prejudiced. That 128mb Geforce 3? I bought that from money I saved shoveling driveways in the winter when I was 13. Once upon a time, GPUs were that affordable.
I think the only reason people are pissed at this fancy new graphics technology, which once upon a time would have us excited, is because the economy is so shit and nobody can afford the GPUs anymore (thanks Trumps economy.) That and the association of AI not being used on our general QoL but at our expense so that a few people can make a buck. You'd have to be a very special moron to say "AI is the reason the economy is bad" and say all this is the fault of AI. It seems that everybody is still looking past the dominant religion of "capitalism" to blame our current problems on. AI implies fancy new tech that everyone could have access to. Capitalism limits that access, and then weaponizes it against us. And yet the current bandwagon is the "AI Hate Train" meanwhile turning a blind eye to Trumps economy and capitalism. Makes sense tho considering most gamers are pro-Trump, right-leaning, economically and politically illiterate incels.
If only a certain country and their president didn't cause the prices of GPU and RAM to skyrocket, maybe it'd be more affordable. That's not AIs fault, that's capitalisms fault. Inb4 China comes out with RTX GPUs for a fraction of the price and leads to a democratization of AI technology. But "it's unaffordable" is how all new tech feats always start, that's how the shiniest new tech has always been. Were people complaining about this when Half Life 2 was being released with all its DX9 bells and whistles? No, because a brand new "512mb GPU" at that time was cutting edge and less affordable, but at least people were being paid enough to make that expense. Now that capitalism has destroyed our economy, people are blaming the prices and not the capitalism. It's silly.
Releases the first working Fusion Reactor "This is terrible because it's too unaffordable. I don't benefit from any of this because my country can't afford it right now."
"If they look like a female fuck-toy that makes my peeny go brrr but they aren't really a female fuck-toy but a human with man parts, then it makes me uncomfortable and it's their fault. They're lying to me about their fuckability which is how I grade women, but if their fuckability challenges my heterosexuality it's because they're a disgusting abomination and I'm just a normal person."
Fascism is European... Europe is an inherently fascist culture. Mountains are reduced to gravel, and water tables are used for coolant, the land becomes uninhabitable and in the european mind this is called "development." Capitalism, fascism, socialism, communism - regardless the whole universe and every living organism in it is open to this sort of insanity. Time to start studying 3rd world, or what europeans like to call "underdeveloped" cultures. The whole Enlightenment started from the indigenous critique of european culture by native americans, the same ideas that (almost) overthrew the monarchy. We need to consult more of THOSE cultures, and less "european continuation" -isms.
Eh, kinda true? Some egalitarian societies had no cops, many did in some way, shape, or form. I don't have the means to provide links as sources but they're out there... Many egalitarian societies had some form of "law" enforcement ("law" in quotations being not just the written-law the Western world is familiar with but cultural codes of conduct and the natural social contract) but had wildly different approaches to it. One society I've read about had seasonal rotations for the role of "police" as no one person could hold that position of authority indefinitely - thereby the abusive authoritarian cop would likely find themselves on the other side when their victims now hold the badge, so better be on your best behaviour when it's your turn.
Some societies would have the cultural practices of ritualistically beating and humiliating their politicians and police on a regular basis, parading them down the streets in clownish makeup while flogging them sticks and whips, pelting them with rotten food and excrement, as a reminder to these people of their place in society and who they work for. If you were a popular or well-liked politican or cop, the people would feel bad and go easy on you. Makes one think twice about taking on those roles, better be on their best behaviour if they do.... A far cry from how we do things nowadays. Not full egalitarian by any means, even if many other practices were egalitarian.
It's shaky ground to classify cultures or societies as "egalitarian" as societies aren't that simple. They're a wild and colourful carnival of social experiments (at least they used to be.) Some societies were egalitarian on seasonal rotation as well, switching back and forth between egalitarian to brutal authoritarian. It's also similar to when people say "egalitarian societies only work in small populations," as there's very little evidence to be convincing either way. Some egalitarian societies were small, some were enormous and spanned continents. In fact, most egalitarian societies were large and you often find strict, hierarchical authoritarianism in smaller groups - especially within families and households. Some hierarchical, authoritarian societies didn't have police either.
Not saying that's what you were saying, but it's more for other readers to not confuse such ideas as "Egalitarian = No cops" or "Egalitarian = No money" etc. Truth is we can have whatever society we want, they're all just playground rules at the end of the day. The ultimate truth is we choose the society we want every day with our actions, the way we treat others, and our politics. The State is just copium for people who wish to believe someone or something is in control, when in reality we live in a perpetual state of anarchy.
If we are to learn from history, and the successes of various resistance groups in Europe when occupied by the Nazis, we would learn that targetting the higher ups and figureheads don't work. What DOES work, is targeting the workers - the average people who facilitate the machine. When the architect of the holocaust was assassinated, it only sped things up and made it worse. So instead resistance groups started doing drive bys on average ol' Deborah's and Johns who was employed to operate the Nazi bureaucracy, do the paperwork, doing the monitoring, doing the deliveries, average folk who worked for them - as destabilizing the machinery is far more effective than targeting figureheads. As leftists know so well - it's the workers that do all the work.
So rather than shooting Musk, it will genuinely be more effective to shoot at Tesla/SpaceX/X employees until they stop showing up to work. Same goes for banks, private equity firms, hedge funds, healthcare insurance companies, etc. They don't even have security detail. There's a million other jobs they could be doing, real work like helping to rebuild, instead they choose to make these demons dreams come true in exchange for a financial bribe. As my atheist father would say about religion - "I fear not the cult leader, but the millions who follow them." Workers and employees of these companies are just as fair, and empirically more effective targets than the billionaire CEOs.
...In a videogame, of course. I would never incite self-defence violence.
Feel free to keep taking the stairs, elevators will get there someday.
I mean I've tried DLSS5 on a bunch of games in my library. On most of them, it tanks my framerates and sometimes looks like absolute ass. But in two of my games (Cyberpunk 2077 and Stellar Blade) it looks and runs incredibly, and it's hard not to see the potential.
As far as everything else you've said I 100% agree. It's just not there yet, I think one day it will be though. I'm lucky I got my 5070 right before the prices started getting jacked up, so I'm privileged to be able to experiment with what's already out. And believe me when I say the results vary - at the moment. Even as a fan of the tech and I can confidently say it's not ready. And yes, studios that cram it as a staple feature in place of good optimization and, quite simply, a good game, then they're gonna fail because they released slop. But that's not the destiny of every game that uses it. I'm telling you, one day this tech is gonna be in mass produced hand-held devices. At the current rate of Nvidia GPU prices, they're not gonna be the ones mass producing it and winning. Only a matter of time till China comes out with a 32gb Vram, Blackwell tech x4 GPU for like $200, meanwhile the 16gb equivalents today will cost under $100. Because Nvidia (while I admit they do produce cool tech) are greedy capitalist bastards. All the AI slop companies are greedy capitalist bastards. And I continue to blame the capitalist bastardary more than I do the shortcuts AI unlocks. If the economy wasn't so shit and things in general were more affordable, and one of these GPUs were affordable after a few months of saving like things were 20 years ago, we'd be much happier with this. However we're overall unhappy with it because it's not being developed for affordable entertainment, but instead being used for surveillance powered by datacenters that destroy our environment so a handful of lizards can make billions, while we're literally struggling to afford groceries. I want to burn down those remote, gated billionaire communities and replace THEM with datacenters for OUR general use.
In many cases that's true, but not in all cases. Makes sense considering that no games have had this technology to be used in their art direction, no wonder it looks like ass. If your only citation for this take is that one Resident Evil screenshot that made headlines then I suggest you look at the world deeper than just headlines and clickbait engagement farming articles.
I guess all these mods that revamp textures or do ENB shaders or lighting adjustments are "bastardizing" the creative vision too. I would argue that even running a game on low-medium settings for the sake of framerate is bastardizing the creative vision, as artists worked very hard to produce high quality assets meant to be seen in it's highest fidelity. Do you consider running games on lower graphics settings a bastardization? Didn't think so.
Again, same with every new generation of graphics tech. It's always a higher entry for performance, it's always in the hands of the few first, and poor performance is also, again, not the fault of AI but bad optimization.
There have always been games that are shit but pushed for graphics, in damn near every console generation since PS2. It's a unique selling point to have shiny graphics. The good games that last on good gameplay and good optimization for good performance are lauded, and for good reason. AI won't change that, if anything make even cooler stuff like HL2 did with it's latest tech. You know what does make shitty games? Situations such as "Studio with best selling game lays off 40% of its developers." And before you say "But they're doing that because AI," again AAA studios have always been doing that since way before, in other industries too, since Thomas Edison. All the EA and Ubisoft controversy? Way before AI. The problem is capitalism, and execs at the top making a buck at the expense of good quality products with planned obsolescence and cheaping out their workers. This is a problem in every industry, AI or not. But these stupid companies that are investing entirely into AI at the expense of good art, writing, and gameplay (whether it uses AI or not) will always fail because it's slop. It's the Charlie and the Chocolate Factory "Machines stole my toothpaste job" stuff, old man yelling at cloud behaviour. It's the exact same logic that blames immigrants for stealing our jobs, without even looking at the bosses who are firing workers and replacing them with exploited immigrants. Is the problem immigration or over exploitation? I view things more towards the latter.
I love AI for what it could be, but we're not ready for it under capitalism. Cognitive offload is only a concern for people who don't respect learning and understanding to begin with, which under capitalism most people don't, being stupid and thoughtless gets you rich these days. I say get them out in the open, let them fail, they deserve it. Smart people don't fall for it. Capitalism is using AI to destroy itself for short-term gains and it's happening right before our eyes - "Capitalists will sell you the rope to hang them with," and all that.
What an utterly constructive addition to the conversation, cheers.
But that's my point, people are complaining about elevators because there's perfectly good stairs. I bet people did say that about elevators, calling them death traps and such, when the early implementations were less safe or less quality. My point is it's the same with AI, people are afraid of this new cutting edge technology that our current capitalist society can't handle.
What does it represent to you? Once upon a time the idea of robots or machinery doing all our work for us, it was a dream. Only under capitalism is that a bad thing, because then people won't be forced to work for unedible money. AI could be a great thing. Under capitalism though, it represents something potentially terrible.
Tell me something, if AI technology applied to protein folds helps us discover a cure for cancer or alzheimers, would you refuse the treatment "because it's AI"? Then apply that to any other technological shortcut that created our modern medicine, like MRIs and CT scans or EKG's. Are those great technologies, or "a ton of lost jobs that humans could have done"? "CT scans are bad because it requires less brain surgeons," or "EKG's are bad because a human could be doing those measurements but have been cheaped out by technology." "What about the cognitive offloading from pocket calculators?" (A real argument made at the time, btw.) Did you know that in Victorian times it was someones job to walk down the streets ringing a bell to wake people up in the morning? People were paid to knock on peoples windows so that they could wake up at a certain time. Are you mad at alarm clocks for taking their jobs? How is AI any different but just on a bigger scale? What are the problems that AI implementation and shortcuts that DOESN'T have to do with relying on a paycheck to live? Is relying on a paycheck to live the only way a society can function? Or does capitalism depend on that, and anything that shakes that is potentially dangerous to our capitalist-centric society?
Capitalism can't handle AI. That's not AIs fault, that's capitalisms shortcomings and inherent unsustainability. Everything wrong with AI is just capitalism, I have yet to see evidence prove me otherwise.
I've been a fan of the most cutting edge videogame graphics since that Half Life 2 E3 demonstration in 2002. Didn't hear anyone complaining about better graphics for less performance at that time. The ragdoll physics, the water reflections, the smart new NPC AI, got people hyped to buy the latest 256mb or 512mb GPUs that were expensive at the time. Hell I remember when the PS2 showcase knocked everyones socks off.
Know what I didn't hear? "Ragdoll physics is destroying gaming. The real way would be to pay a village of animators to do keyframe animations of every possible way a character can fall over, instead they use this tool as an excuse to cut back on animators. This is an affront to devs artistic vision and a slap in the face to animators who are now out of potential work." I didn't see these complaints when Nvidia release DX9, DX10, or DX11, that all required the latest GPUs of the time and slowed down framerates on the "more affordable" GPUs. Doom 3 ran like shit on my 128mb Geforce 3. Except now that this has an association to AI, people are being prejudiced. That 128mb Geforce 3? I bought that from money I saved shoveling driveways in the winter when I was 13. Once upon a time, GPUs were that affordable.
I think the only reason people are pissed at this fancy new graphics technology, which once upon a time would have us excited, is because the economy is so shit and nobody can afford the GPUs anymore (thanks Trumps economy.) That and the association of AI not being used on our general QoL but at our expense so that a few people can make a buck. You'd have to be a very special moron to say "AI is the reason the economy is bad" and say all this is the fault of AI. It seems that everybody is still looking past the dominant religion of "capitalism" to blame our current problems on. AI implies fancy new tech that everyone could have access to. Capitalism limits that access, and then weaponizes it against us. And yet the current bandwagon is the "AI Hate Train" meanwhile turning a blind eye to Trumps economy and capitalism. Makes sense tho considering most gamers are pro-Trump, right-leaning, economically and politically illiterate incels.
If only a certain country and their president didn't cause the prices of GPU and RAM to skyrocket, maybe it'd be more affordable. That's not AIs fault, that's capitalisms fault. Inb4 China comes out with RTX GPUs for a fraction of the price and leads to a democratization of AI technology. But "it's unaffordable" is how all new tech feats always start, that's how the shiniest new tech has always been. Were people complaining about this when Half Life 2 was being released with all its DX9 bells and whistles? No, because a brand new "512mb GPU" at that time was cutting edge and less affordable, but at least people were being paid enough to make that expense. Now that capitalism has destroyed our economy, people are blaming the prices and not the capitalism. It's silly.
Releases the first working Fusion Reactor "This is terrible because it's too unaffordable. I don't benefit from any of this because my country can't afford it right now."
Nice try.
"If they look like a female fuck-toy that makes my peeny go brrr but they aren't really a female fuck-toy but a human with man parts, then it makes me uncomfortable and it's their fault. They're lying to me about their fuckability which is how I grade women, but if their fuckability challenges my heterosexuality it's because they're a disgusting abomination and I'm just a normal person."
Hostel desk picture? Def Luigi. The taxi/uber picture? Def Luigi also, look at those eyebrows.
Security footage of Thompson being shot? Different height, build, clothes, and hands.
I thought they were talking about gold.
Hewers
Takes people like you and me being brave enough to not show up to work.
Americans don't hate him enough to do that.
Fascism is European... Europe is an inherently fascist culture. Mountains are reduced to gravel, and water tables are used for coolant, the land becomes uninhabitable and in the european mind this is called "development." Capitalism, fascism, socialism, communism - regardless the whole universe and every living organism in it is open to this sort of insanity. Time to start studying 3rd world, or what europeans like to call "underdeveloped" cultures. The whole Enlightenment started from the indigenous critique of european culture by native americans, the same ideas that (almost) overthrew the monarchy. We need to consult more of THOSE cultures, and less "european continuation" -isms.
I'm afraid to tell you that, so far, Luigi is the only American with some balls.
They used to be involved in a cult. They still are, but they used to, too.
Eh, kinda true? Some egalitarian societies had no cops, many did in some way, shape, or form. I don't have the means to provide links as sources but they're out there... Many egalitarian societies had some form of "law" enforcement ("law" in quotations being not just the written-law the Western world is familiar with but cultural codes of conduct and the natural social contract) but had wildly different approaches to it. One society I've read about had seasonal rotations for the role of "police" as no one person could hold that position of authority indefinitely - thereby the abusive authoritarian cop would likely find themselves on the other side when their victims now hold the badge, so better be on your best behaviour when it's your turn.
Some societies would have the cultural practices of ritualistically beating and humiliating their politicians and police on a regular basis, parading them down the streets in clownish makeup while flogging them sticks and whips, pelting them with rotten food and excrement, as a reminder to these people of their place in society and who they work for. If you were a popular or well-liked politican or cop, the people would feel bad and go easy on you. Makes one think twice about taking on those roles, better be on their best behaviour if they do.... A far cry from how we do things nowadays. Not full egalitarian by any means, even if many other practices were egalitarian.
It's shaky ground to classify cultures or societies as "egalitarian" as societies aren't that simple. They're a wild and colourful carnival of social experiments (at least they used to be.) Some societies were egalitarian on seasonal rotation as well, switching back and forth between egalitarian to brutal authoritarian. It's also similar to when people say "egalitarian societies only work in small populations," as there's very little evidence to be convincing either way. Some egalitarian societies were small, some were enormous and spanned continents. In fact, most egalitarian societies were large and you often find strict, hierarchical authoritarianism in smaller groups - especially within families and households. Some hierarchical, authoritarian societies didn't have police either.
Not saying that's what you were saying, but it's more for other readers to not confuse such ideas as "Egalitarian = No cops" or "Egalitarian = No money" etc. Truth is we can have whatever society we want, they're all just playground rules at the end of the day. The ultimate truth is we choose the society we want every day with our actions, the way we treat others, and our politics. The State is just copium for people who wish to believe someone or something is in control, when in reality we live in a perpetual state of anarchy.
Seriously...
If we are to learn from history, and the successes of various resistance groups in Europe when occupied by the Nazis, we would learn that targetting the higher ups and figureheads don't work. What DOES work, is targeting the workers - the average people who facilitate the machine. When the architect of the holocaust was assassinated, it only sped things up and made it worse. So instead resistance groups started doing drive bys on average ol' Deborah's and Johns who was employed to operate the Nazi bureaucracy, do the paperwork, doing the monitoring, doing the deliveries, average folk who worked for them - as destabilizing the machinery is far more effective than targeting figureheads. As leftists know so well - it's the workers that do all the work.
So rather than shooting Musk, it will genuinely be more effective to shoot at Tesla/SpaceX/X employees until they stop showing up to work. Same goes for banks, private equity firms, hedge funds, healthcare insurance companies, etc. They don't even have security detail. There's a million other jobs they could be doing, real work like helping to rebuild, instead they choose to make these demons dreams come true in exchange for a financial bribe. As my atheist father would say about religion - "I fear not the cult leader, but the millions who follow them." Workers and employees of these companies are just as fair, and empirically more effective targets than the billionaire CEOs.
...In a videogame, of course. I would never incite
self-defenceviolence.