Companies are terrified of AI making their work obsolete. To such a degree they are trying to do it first. Thankfully AI is so painfully bad that the companies that have tried this are failing hard.
Loving the game, do agree though that it starts to get a bit muddled and confusing - at times it feels like I’m not really sure which quests I’m doing, why I’m doing it or what I’m trying to achieve – very realistic to real life in that regard but it can feel a bit of a chore
I kind of stopped paying attention to side quests. In a lot of RPGs, I feel like they’re discrete, separate errands, and usually contained within the area where they’re given. BG3 side quests seem a lot more integrated, in the sense that I’ll often just happen along the next step in one as I pursue main quest. If not, then it may be because the next step is in the next Act. And some of them seem to be mutually exclusive.
Maybe because it’s my first play through, but I’m now in ‘if it happens, it happens’ mode, and I’m confident that there are enough opportunities for me to make different choices to have a substantially different experience next time.
Running on Windows 11 with a 6900XT and Vulkan and DX11 look effectively identical as far as I can tell but Vulkan runs a lot faster and doesn't stutter when loading a new area.
Unfortunately though it tends to crash on tab out which means I need to use DX11 because I play with friends.
Yes. It’s not really meant as a visual improvement but as an efficiency improvement. Sadly it does seem (for some, myself included) that the Vulkan build needs a bit of work. For me it crashes all the time, and Larian themselves mentioned that it isn’t quite as stable as the DX11 build.
I guess that means I’ll buy it when the full story is finished and all the episodes released? 🤷 I just don’t have any interest in buying half a story.
Edit: okay, read the article. Kind of odd, in so far as they already have everything finished, but they’re doling out the game in pieces. Maybe as a kind of marketing strategy?
I don’t really get it, but at least they have the game done and are planning to release it at a reasonable price. 👍
Telltale games were just like that. Its episodes in that each section has an arc and usually a cliffhanger of an ending.
Its part marketing and part way to keep everyone interested and feeling like they get the story at the same time. Its meant to feel like TV where you had control of the story to some degree but it continues forward no matter what.
yeah i’m skeptical for the same reason. “Episodic” seems to always end in disaster for devs, but hey, who knows? The market has changed a lot in the past few years, maybe episodic makes more sense now?
Yes but frame rate is primarily about responsiveness, not aesthetics,
In games that tie physics and inputs to frame rate, 25-30 fps is about a 30-40 millisecond response in the worst case; usually less. That’s plenty fast enough in most games I’ve played. And not all games do that anyway. So I can’t say I agree with your statement as a general rule.
What game do you play where that’s not fast enough?
In any case, it’s irrelevant to my point. The comment you responded to is explicitly about the frame rates feeling choppy. Meaning visual effect.
You also said “feel” not “look”. If you exclusively meant aesthetics you should clarify it in your own comment.
Also, responsiveness is not about if something is “fast enough” it’s about making the thought>action gap as small as possible for better immersion and player control. Higher FPS means there is a more consistent time from input to effect. If i press a button in a 30 fps game the input delay can be anything from almost none to 1/30th of a second (30ms, which if you played online games back in the day is not great), and there is no way to tell how much it will be. The more frames the less of a possible variance you experience.
Also all input is tied to framerate, if you have examples of games that have their input loop completely separate from framerate I’m all ears, especially given rendering is not on demand.
I did, in order to express that I was thinking of overall sense conveyed by the visuals, rather than whether differences in frame rate could be noticed under scrutiny. Words often have multiple meanings depending on context.
[Edit: I also said “choppy”, referring to the slide-show-like visual effect that most of us have seen at very low frame rates. I also described animation mechanics that are obviously about the appearance of motion. So there was no reason to assume that I was talking about the inter-frame input lag on which you are so fixated.]
you should clarify it in your own comment.
I could, but I won’t. I already clarified for you twice. I’m not interested in further indulging your combative insistence on misinterpretating what I wrote, and nobody else seems to have had trouble understanding me. Bye bye.
Inability to learn from your mistakes is nothing to be proud of. Delete this
Someone misinterpreting what I wrote because they only paid attention to part of it does not make it a mistake.
When they follow up by trying to re-frame the topic that I started into a different one, and then criticize me for not having addressed their pet topic, and furthermore tell me I should have used different words so that they can avoid admitting their misunderstanding… well, that’s just willful aggression.
Much like your comment to me is aggressive, and rude. You are now blocked.
The difference being 25 v. 30 is the murky side of DF here.
The game runs at 40fps on Switch2 in handheld and in docked with a 120hz display. DF chose to lock it to a 60hz display so the game would lock back to 30.
eurogamer.net
Ważne