Wow, shocked! If asa releases on Xbox it will be horrid. I quit after 30 hours of dealing with crashes and performance issues. That’s just single player, official servers crash every 1-2 hours and roll back, deleting tames and wiping your inventory.
Yet some still defend wildcard as if they don’t have nearly a decade of experience working on this game. It’s obvious upper management is the issue , but I’m not supporting this crap again.
Edit: 2.5-3.5x faster cpu and 2x faster gpu at slightly higher tdp (23W vs 19W). Even if the arm x86 emulation has 40% overhead it’d still be faster and more efficient especially at lower power limits where arm shines.
This is based on benchmarks from Qualcomm, not Internet reviews right? IDK if I’d be buying tickets for the hype train just yet.
Shifting all the software to work on ARM is going to take time. By the time Valve got everything running on ARM, AMD would have released something equal or better by then.
This is not based on benchmarks from qualcomm, it’s based on benchmarks revievers ran on demo units.
You don’t need to shift the software to work on arm. Most essential things already work and the ones that don’t can be emulated. All valve needs to do is to make it seamless. And unless they also switch to arm its a long shot for amd to achieve a 2x uplift in a single generation.
Kind of I guess. Reviewers where allowed to run specific benchmarks approved by Qualcomm on laptops specifically made for Qualcomm at the launch event, not consumer models.
What games run in ARM today? I’m not aware of any games that run nativly on ARM, meaning games would need to be emulate from Windows to Linux, then from x86 to ARM. Not ideal.
And we still don’t have a price. The APU in the Steam Deck is a budget chip, if the X Elite is really 2x the competition Qualcomm will likely be charging almost 2x the price
I hate being that guy… but nobody is emulating windows. It’s a compatibility layer. If they can emulate the x86 instructions (like apple is doing with the M chips and some open source implementations out there) then he compatibility layer could be 100% compiled for arm.
I’ve seen pc games running on phones using this tech. With valve backing, it’s definitely possible, but not before stea,m deck 3
Only 10% of games are verified for Stream OS, with 40% being listed as unsupported. I’m pretty sure Valve is more focused on stability for Steam OS, switching to ARM only complicates things at the moment. Once they have that figured out they can consider ARM. The games that work on ARM now do so because of developer support, most games aren’t supported yet.
I’m not saying it’s impossible, of course it is. It’s just not the time for the Steam Deck to switch to ARM, SD 3 sounds like a reasonable time to consider it.
There are not just bugs. The game is also baby easy. All the fallback mechanism made it so you basically can’t fail, the game throws money at you. The whole economy is balanced around fallbacks instead of really balancing, because you can’t balance what isn’t working to begin with.
Played it yesterday for a while and I agree. It ran pretty smooth on my RTX 3060 without noticable issues, but it was very easy. I built a starter city fulfilling basic demands, and I ended up with more money than I started with. At that time I was usually into my second credit on the old game, scraping along.
I personally don’t understand the problems people have with performance. I’m used to playing Cities 1 at 15 fps with 200k-700k cities.
Cities 2 is a game with modern quality graphic settings, not a 2015 game. What do y’all expect? It’s not a twitchy FPS game. My Cities 2 city is only at 100k now though, with a 3060 btw.
What, how? Are you just leaving the settings at default and giving up? They basically have said what is broken. If you turn those settings off it works alright.
What I’m noticing is that the first game had 2015 graphics and on a medium to large city runs at cinematic framerates (20-30fps). On Cities 2 the graphics are a mishmash of 2010 and 2025 graphics that run somewhat poorly, but also stutter a lot. On my 10k city I’m getting 45fps average with low-medium settings with the recommended changes to improve performance, but large lag spikes are frequent.
I loved factions in tlou 1. The microtransactions definitely sucked, but it has a special place in my heart. I would play it with my college roommate for hours. Been really looking forward to it. This gives me a glimmer of hope that it hasn’t been cancelled, but all the other news about it has me worried
Can't wait to get more Losomn content! Remnant 2 is an fun experience and a great follow-up to the first game, if you liked that one you definitely need to give R2 a try too
Standard tactic when making unpopular changes, and a company would really like to keep them. Sacrificial CEO gets replaced, to make it look like things changed.
And the fun part is, you’ve still had a decades long lifestyle of having low prices by exploiting weak labour laws in poor countries! And if they raise prices by using your local labour you’ll still cry capitalism. Isn’t it fun?
More resources are put in because there is an incredible amount of money to make with the game industry being bigger than movies and music combined. It’s no longer a niche upcoming industry but mainstream. And companies put in those resources because the market is that much bigger with more potential return on investment.
Game would $100 but the same as they are now. Could be $200 and it’d be the same as they are now and still have mtx, since why would a company leave the option to get more money. Few companies operate with the approach of this is enough money we are content.
And games have only gotten worse if you are looking at triple a titles the same way someone might say movies have gotten worse because they think high budget super hero movies are the only ones that exist.
If the market could sustain $100 it would be, but barrier to making and releasing games has never been lower. So consumers would just move to alternative games that are cheaper or old titles they haven’t gotten around to. And worst of all to these comlanies the top sellers aren’t always these high budget titles, but some indie title that’s not even 3d. Then there’s game pass people would just turn to if game prices went up moving more people to subscription.
Most companies needing $100 per unit for a game to be profitable aren’t going to bother approving that type of game to begin with over a game that can be priced $100 and have much broader mainstream appeal.
Why would a company want to risk putting money into a game so niche it needs $100 per unit over a game that can make more money despite being priced $60. And you know… Just price it $100.
If a game today came with a nice solid box, a cloth map, a 250 page manual that actually explains almost everything about the mechanics of the game, and WAS FUCKING FINISHED WHEN I BUY IT, getting maybe one patch and otherwise never changing, then I might be willing to pay more.
The ability to patch games has been a huge improvement, but it has also caused most games to release in state that is worse than older games ever were. Maybe after 6 months to anyear a modern game is at a comparable level of finish to older games, but only if it sold well. Lots of games don’t get the patching they need.
Yes Mario 64 has a lot of glitches, but it’s playable all the way through. Similarly superman 64 is notable for being a buggy Ness because it was uncommon. BG3 released with multiple game breaking bugs, same with Stanfield. Payday 3 has several crashing bugs, but nothing gamebreaking beyond overloaded servers.
eurogamer.net
Ważne