Yeah. Ive seen this same article posted every year since Sony premiered Ghost of Tsushima across the road from the LACC. Before that, they said it was dead when they banned booth babes. It also hasnt existed for the last 3 years.
Well yeah but the esa was still trying to keep it running. This is the final announcement that they aren’t even trying anymore. It’s done done this time
I just wish the games that are remade/remastered are basically just graphic updates, with some bug fixes and minor qol additions. That’s it. Not like what they did to ff7.
Hell, diablo 2 Remaster was good. The addition of being able to swap between new and old graphics on the fly is amazing tbh.
I feel publishers are doing small stabs at originals while doing full milk-yo-wallet efforts with remakes/remasters. Pretty conservative approach, imo.
Not sure I fully belive this. Multiple devs have said they were consulted about the proposed policy, gave negative feedback, and were ignored. Unity knew what they were doing and claiming it was rushed sounds like a weak attempt to dodge accountability.
I just bought the remaster of Ark (Yeah I’m a consumer whore, I know). It looks fantastic, incredible visuals but I’m not sure if the frame rate matches with how good it looks.
this one honestly sounds like a pretty solid entry in the soulslike games. people really seem to enjoy it and i’ve read multiple comparisons of this to DS1
Yeah I am really enjoying it. Had a great year for soulslikes with lies of P and now this. I am playing on ps5 and performance is pretty good but framerate drops do happen and some areas are pretty rough. I don’t really have any problem with the enemy placement except where I am currently stuck fighting 3 mini bosses and a bunch of dogs/ranged attackers in a row which is a bit much. I recently recently replayed all the souls games and think the comparison to ds1 is probably correct but its parry combat is closer to sekiro though not quite as snappy.
Fsr frame gen was just released. Dlss frame gen wasn’t perfect either at release (even now it still has ui issues).
Fsr frame gen for me looks pretty impressive for a rushed release. I’ll need to see how it evolves and if amd can solve the antilag+ latency with frame gen and enhance smoothness.
I also want to see how amd can enhance fsr upscaling image quality, as currently the worse image quality compared to dlss frame gen is because of fsr beeing less good than dlss upscaling.
For consoles, well it’s another reason for devs to create unoptimised games, while giving the 60 fps console players could “finally” experience, and want with the curent gen.
However on another side it’s also a way to get better smoothness (well see), at at negligible (for console players) image quality loss. Most console players play on a TV, pretty far from it. So quality won’t affect them much.
Guarantee you the FSR-DLSS gap will be filled shortly after AMD has competitive AI coprocessors on their cards. People say a lot about all the training DLSS does on NVIDIAs cloud blah blah but the real reason it’s better is because it runs on hardware that is otherwise idle and so can just do more without eating into latency or performance. It’s the same reason XeSS on Intel GPUs is better than FSR.
What would really be impressive is if AMD can get FSR to leverage the AI cores on all three cards. If the goal of being “open” is trying to nullify NVIDIAs advantage then that would go a long way to killing DLSS as a point of distinction.
eurogamer.net
Ważne