>>507212600> You used a terrible metric for proving it's realismSee I'm not trying to prove realism, I'm saying it's good enough if the fantasy tricks our brain.
You however are obsessed with matching real life counterparts or you don't consider it viable.
If sound design is necessary then explain why deaf people also feel the same emotions watching the Lion King?
What about feeling for an animated lineart of an inanimate object that moves in a plain void without any fancy framing or visuals?
Or using an example you brought up yourself, Overwatch porn.
It was trending around the top of the most searched porn and those are basically stylized Pixar characters, not exactly realistic.
Then we could take literature that has no imagery whatsoever, yet erotic literature can still give people an orgasm.
When you think about this for more than 2 seconds, you'll start noticing how matching realty isn't exactly necessary and your argument is plain wrong.
Sex doll itself already goes a long way fooling our brains. If it has a mouth that's warm, moist and has a moving tongue, along with the doll having artificial breathing and some AI generated moaning, you can bet your ass it's good enough.
But I'm done with you, not like there's getting through to you as that knowitall ego is a bit too big to admit you were completely wrong. Then again you can barely capitalize your letters, so maybe it's just plain stupidity at play.