One winner and five nominee’s. Let’s not downplay being in the top 6 nominations for “best game of the year” as “losing.” It’s an incredible achievement no matter how you look at it.
I loved that they also kept the whole cassette futurism aesthetic, unlike the newer movies of the franchise. The one thing I would wish for is that the horror segments are a bit less repetitive / samey.
I thought the new one, Romulus, did a pretty good job of keeping the retro look going. I actually didn’t like the movie itself very much, but props & costumes did a good job lol.
I had this on my “to play” list for years and finally did a full play through as the first game on my new OLED monitor. It holds up incredibly well so many years later. The AI, sound design, and lighting really carry the game, and when I went back to watch Alien I realized how true to the source material it was. 9/10 game for me, had my heart racing numerous times but I thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I could only do an hour or two a day but wow, very glad I pushed myself to finish it. Probably the most fun I’ve had with a game’s AI since STALKER’s A-Life or FEAR’s AI.
You clicked the tree somewhere and it would tell you either to try again, or you would win something. I think most people who won got $5 and a monkey plush toy. I’m not sure anyone ever won the jackpot. You could just click over and over again trying to remember where you had previously clicked, like a treasure hunt. Meanwhile they’re showing banner ads on the page.
I still have two stuffed monkeys I “won” from that site, from when I was young and stupid and didn’t realize I was probably paying for them with my personal data.
Microsoft and Google really aren’t too dissimilar, in a lot of ways. The only reason why Xbox still exists isn’t because they’re so incredibly passionate about it. There was a niche for them to make money, and they’ve created a product in it, that has the minimum viable qualities to complete. Issue is that just as Google does, they stopped caring about it entirely, after the initial pitch
Haha I’m the same way. So many of the vocal players say “it’s a PVP game, there’s not supposed to be anywhere safe!” But yeah, I just really like the sailing mechanics, the exploration of diving to sunken ships, sailing in storms and hunting megaladons. Getting stomped by some hardcore players while in the middle of an adventure was never fun to me.
It wouldn’t be such a problem if PVP weren’t so insanely janky. It feels like there’s no feedback and most of the skill in combat is rushing the other crew before they know what’s going on and getting used to how laggy the blunderbuss is.
They’re good at that. I remember trying Skyrim when it was new and we all didn’t know there would be like 15 rereleases and it felt weirdly dated. I couldn’t really put my finger on why, it just felt old.
Maybe this time it’ll ship with an Ethernet port and joycons that last more than 6mo!
Jokes aside, very curious what changes they’ll make. Incredibly unlikely they are going to target 4K but hopefully we will see a stable 1080p @60 across the board.
I just don’t see Nintendo making the jump tbh. They always lag behind resolution and FPS by a pretty large margin. Maybe we’ll see 1440p on TV’s and 1080p handhelds, but I’m also throwing darts at the board here lol
The games shouldn’t be designed with upscalers to be used to hit desired performance. We’re already seeing it with UE5 (Remnant 2) where performance without upscaling is abysmal.
If they go this route, the hardware will age incredibly quick. It’s not sustainable, especially since DLSS is tied to hardware. It would be better if FSR were implemented since it can run on anything, but the main point is that games should not require upscale tech to hit minimum performance. That leaves zero room for improvement over the life of the product and gives the user less reasons to adopt it.
My opinion though. I thought Nintendo handled the switch great for what it was. I have high hopes for the switch 2 regardless.
Does the NVIDIA Tegra line support DLSS? I guess it could be based on the “Orin” line of ARM CPUs, but I can’t find anything suggesting they can do DLSS.
I have to ask… why? The only device I’ve connected to hardwired Ethernet is a desktop PC in the same room as my router. I’ve not used ethernet for any portable device for eons. Why would you need it?
Latency on wireless controllers isn't a big deal (and a lot of Smash players are using wired Gamecube controllers anyway), but it's not a big deal on wi-fi either. The problem with wi-fi is packet loss and not being able to send and receive at the same time, which feels like latency in fits and starts, because it has to wait until the packet sends successfully. Ethernet helps with Smash, but it still sorely needs rollback netcode regardless. Even on a wire, you're still on delay-based netcode.
they do use bluetooth. However, it should be noted that not all BT devices are created equally. Check out this table from RTINGS.com of reviews of wireless bluetooth headsets. You can see that the very worst headsets have 300+ milliseconds of latency, while the very best have almost 0 ms of latency. I imagine that the Joycons hit a similarly low latency.
Because they’ve been standard for literally decades and Nintendo has released/probably will continue to release games that depend on streaming, such as Kingdom Hearts, which is unplayable over wifi.
Most people who have a switch do not have an OLED switch. I do hope they carry over the ethernet port for the next iteration. They’ve added and removed it before!
I still remember my first playthrough. Low level character. I save scummed until I could sneak into the tower in the heart of the Imperial City. In the council chamber was a mage with an incredibly powerful staff. I pickpocketed it off of him, again using save scumming. I then traveled to Bravil and entered the castle there. As the Count of Bravil was giving a speech, I pulled out the staff and zapped him dead on his throne, right in front the of the whole court. I then got away from the assassination through the brilliant escape plan of running out the front door, murder weapon still in hand.
My favorite story was actually from my buddy’s playthrough. He duped the poison apple from the assassin’s guild quest using the arrow glitch. He then duped it 50 more times and put-pocketed one into everyone’s pockets in a specific town. When they all went to lunch they ate them and died. An entire town of dead people. It was hilarious.
I beat the entire thieves guild quest line starting at basically level 1 by using the strategy of “run fast”. There were some major flaws that kept me from loving that game properly, so I’m hoping it’s more user friendly with the remake. But I could definitely see a lot of charm in it.
If it isn’t one of the ugliest games I’ve ever played though. Why is every character a shiny, pudgy, orange?
Yup. I’m pretty sour on Bethesda RPGs after getting burned hard by Starfield. But I have a hard time imagining even they could fuck up a simple remastering of a game I already loved in the past.
So Nintendo filed the patent, and paid the maintenance fees over the years. Did they even do anything with it beyond that one game? How much money did they think they gained just by preventing others from implementing a similar mechanic?
In 2006, Dyack said “absolutely yes” in response to the question of a possible sequel. He stated that Silicon Knights had intended for Eternal Darkness to be a stand-alone game, but they wanted to make more games set in the same universe involving the Ancients.[54][55] At Microsoft’s Spring 2008 Showcase, Dyack said there was a “strong chance” they would return to the Eternal Darkness brand.[56] In 2011, Silicon Knights said they were refocusing on one of their most requested titles for the next generation of consoles. This, combined with the fact that Nintendo had trademarked the title once again, spawned rumors that an Eternal Darkness game would be a launch title for Nintendo’s Wii U console.[57] However, the project was cancelled due to Silicon Knights’ legal troubles with Epic Games.[58] Any possibility for a sequel from Silicon Knights ended in 2013 when Silicon Knights filed for bankruptcy and closed its offices.[59] Nintendo has repeatedly renewed the Eternal Darknesstrademark, stirring rumors of sequels or re-releases.[60][61][62][63]
Followed by Dyack forming another studio, botching three crowdfunding attempts, forming another studio, then shuttering the project.
Eh. They’ve been great at that but I dont see this as it. Handheld stuff is cool and popular right now. Don’t get me wrong, they definitely could self sabotage here. They 100% did with the vita and their egregiously expensive memory cards…
But the PSP and Vita were great devices aside from that. I could see this working
Vita was technically impressive, far more capable than the DS. I’ve got an OLED Vita and I’m amazed how nice it still looks.
But the Vita inevietably lost to Nintendo because it struggled with popularity, and therefore struggled with number of games made for it. It’s a catch 22.
If Sony can make a portable that plays all your PS5 library (without needing to buy any of it again) then they might actually be on a winner.
The Vita was a 3DS competitor, not a DS competitor. They kind of tried to outgimmick Nintendo with this one, unsuccessfully, I might add, because they didn’t build the system around these features, but slapped them on in such a way that developers and players could just ignore them.
The PS5 controller is somewhat of a descendant of this device, although its features are a bit better supported - and it would be trivially easy to integrate them into a handheld.
As for processing power, they need to find a way to get the same CPU power as a base PS5 and enough GPU power for somewhere around 1080p (since going any lower would render many games designed for the home console unplayable) into a cost-, heat, space- and power-efficient package. Most of this work is on AMD, Sony just has to package it. Maybe they can get away with a system that simply forces a lower output resolution for existing games so that less GPU power is needed - or they wait long enough for it to be possible to miniaturize a full-fat PS5 into a portable device. I think the latter is unlikely though, at least within a time frame that would allow for a PS5P to coexist with the PS5 instead of the PS6.
I genuinely think it’s already possible. The PS5 doesn’t exactly have a very new processor, it’s a 4000-series (desktop) Renoir, 7nm, Zen 2 architecture. The Z1E (the chip in the Lenovo Legion Go & ROG Ally X) is a 7040-series (mobile) Phoenix, 4nm, Zen 4/RDNA3 architecture.
The Z1E is basically 10% less performant for about 1/4 the juice. You could easily keep the same resolution, whilst dropping things like particles, shadow effects, etc that aren’t going to be as missed on a much smaller display. I’ve got a Legion but I believe the Ally X has a docked higher TDP mode that would push it to being competitive with the PS5, or at least it would certainly be possible with an active cooling dock.
AMD literally designed the Z1E for handhelds, so Sony would be remiss not to use it. That or a potential “Z2E” successor chip seen as this one is pushing over 18 months since it was announced.
You could easily keep the same resolution, whilst dropping things like particles, shadow effects, etc
This would require per-game adjustments, which is not something you can ask of devs mid-gen, especially not retroactively. Developers already hate that they have to optimize for Xbox Series S - and that console was available from the start. This portable PS5 can only be a success if it “just works” and the only way to do that is by having the exact amount of CPU power as the home console and reducing the output resolution automatically, perhaps with the help of PSSR. Until there is an efficient APU that can pull this off, the console can’t be released.
PS5, kinda famously, has no exclusive games. I doubt it would be that taxing on devs to essentially create a build that changes it from Ultra settings to High equivalent to the PC versions when they’re all running on an x86 platform. The Series S is just garbage hardware that Microsoft should have never released, the Z1E already outperforms it handily.
This chip would be more than capable of matching the PS5’s APU. But the Z2 they’re releasing alongside it will be decently cheaper while matching the Z1E’s performance. So it’ll come down to whether Sony prioritises cost or performance. My money’s on cost though, they’re going to want this thing to be cheaper than a Steam Deck, and the Z2E will put it in Legion Go/Ally X price territory.
Gaming journalists sure want a Sony monopoly of gaming consoles, don’t they?
If Xbox didn’t exist, consumers could only choose PlayStation. Nintendo has shown they have no interest in making real console hardware to compete with Sony or Microsoft anymore, so consumers will get literally only one console choice. That’s bad. Especially since they could set prices at whatever they want and nobody could challenge it.
I get journalists hate Xbox, but Xbox needs to exist as a consumer option.
The Steam Deck is not a console, it is a handheld Linux PC with “console gaming” TV output as an afterthought, just like the Nintendo Switch is a handheld android tablet with console gaming as an afterthought.
K… This is just not true. Plenty of AAA games run well on the steam deck. Currently installed on mine, RDR2, cyberpunk 2077, horizon zero dawn, Forza horizon, uncharted legacy of thieves, the last of us, and for funsies I just started another fallout 4 playthrough. I’m sure others have lots of other AAA games they play on their deck.
If it’s the exclusives you’re missing, like Gran Turismo or something, I think that’s a different argument.
Being able to play AAA games is not a qualifier for a console. My PC can also play AAA games, but it is not a console.
The Steam Deck, and Switch, are both handhelds. It is a subcategory of game console, but it is not considered a game console just the same as a Game Boy is not considered a console, but it is a handheld. Both the Steam Deck and Switch have a screen and internal battery, along with a controller that is built onto the device, like a Game Boy.
A Steam Machine is a Linux PC, but is more similar to a console than the Steam Deck.
I mean, the nuance you describe is notable. But I sit on the couch, using controllers and play the same games you would on ps or Xbox. Both of which run variants of Linux/windows.
I think that's the point bro above is making tho... sure you an use it like one. But it does not compete directly with PS5 and Xbox. Different audience and primary use case is different.
If Xbox dies, steam deck is not a proper substitute for people who buy TV consoles. I guess steam could make steam console tho tbh
it aint ready for mainstream, it still has issues and translation layer aint perfect at all. my gaming rig is on linux. I guess this will be resolved at some point and valve will release a TV console version.
The hardware is not in the same class, in fact it literally under powered because it is a handheld. Guy who wants headshot noobs 4 loolz wants that 4k60 fps experience.
not “features” per se, but consoles have a better performance-to-price ratio compared to handhelds. In the bill of materials for a handheld you’re paying for a screen and battery that are unnecessary expenses if you just need a console. in a console, that money will go towards higher powered hardware to run games, and maybe some other ancillary things. Also in a console you can have a better cooling system since you’re not constrained to a mobile form factor. Also in a console you can use higher power since performance is not being balanced with batter life.
Reading through the above comments it seems like goalposts keep moving on what counts as a console. Does the wii u not count as a console because the controller had a screen and the price to performance is poor?
I’m not sure any of you have a concrete definition for a console, and maybe there isn’t one. It might be more of a spectrum with open and configurable devices on one end and the more focused devices with walled garden software on the other.
Then you can say that ps5 is more like a console than steam deck is, and steam deck is more like a console than a pc.
Does the wii u not count as a console because the controller had a screen and the price to performance is poor?
The WiiU Gamepad did not function on its own, it had to be connected to the actual console in order to function. It was literally a controller with a screen. It did not have any functionality without the console.
The person I was responding to was citing costs accrued for screen and battery as a reasoning for why steam deck is not a console, so I was giving an example (wii u) that contradicts that reasoning.
I don’t actually care if you consider the steam deck or wii u or anything is a console or not. My point was that I don’t see a concrete definition anywhere in this thread and that maybe a more nuanced view would be appropriate.
I see. I will try to provide as detailed of a concrete definition as possible for you.
A video game console is an electronic device that is built with the specific purpose of playing video games. It can do other things as well, but its primary function that it is designed around is playing video games. A console does not have a built in screen or control device, but instead those devices are separate and connect to the console in order to give it inputs and for it to output its signal to the user. A video game console does not run a standard computer operating system that one might find on a workstation, but it can run a modified version of a standard operating system that is specifically optimized for the console hardware to play video games more efficiently The console device is to be placed in a permanent location while in operation, and must be plugged into an electrical socket or similar power supply, as it is not powered by an internal battery.
A handheld is a subcategory of video game console that differs by having a screen and controller built into the device. It is not in a permanent location while in operation, rather it is operated while held in the users hands. These have a battery to provide power to the unit.
Ah, that does clarify a lot. You’re wanting a term to refer to the Xbox and Playstation class devices since they’re in this closely competing realm, but people already have a preconceived notion of what a “console” is (I would consider handheld to be consoles, for example).
It does seem like it would be useful to have a term for those.
Well this is the traditional definition of a video game console, it includes all video game consoles before the current generation. For example, the SNES, SEGA Genesis, and PC Engine/TurboGrafx16 were all competing consoles, but the SEGA GameGear and Nintendo Gameboy were not competing with those consoles.
As I said, handhelds are a subcategory of console. Like how a laptop is a subcategory of personal computer.
If it’s a subcategory of console then it is a console. Otherwise it’s like saying a square is not a rectangle because it is a square, or a cat is not a mammal because it is a cat.
That’s why I say you are searching for a term for things like the Xbox and Playstation - because it would be useful to have a term for that. Simply “console” is not a good fit imo, but you may disagree.
A handheld is a kind of console. It is not in competition or in the same class as a regular console.
A square is a kind of rectangle, nobody that says “draw a rectangle” expects you to draw a square, they expect a box with two sides longer than the other two but equal in length to each other adjoined at 90° angles. A square is a subcategory of rectangle. Its definition includes some features of a rectangle, but it also has other features that define it as clearly different from a rectangle.
Likewise a laptop is a subcategory of personal computer. A tablet such as a Microsoft Surface could also be a subcategory of personal computer. But if someone talks about their PC, you don’t think of a laptop or Surface.
Its the same with consoles and handhelds. By technicality one could call a handheld a console in the same way a person could call a Surface a personal computer, but that would be the same as calling a hot dog a sandwich, or calling a submarine a boat.
Perhaps “home console” would be more descriptive, but since video game consoles were always understood to not be handheld devices, there is no need to subdivide the parent category. Just “consoles” and “handhelds” works fine.
i would say the wiiu is a special case console. they tried adding a screen to a typical console design and it didn’t really work. that’s why they pivoted to the switch which is much more like a portable than a console.
the vast, vast majority of consoles don’t have screens built into their controllers.
Most of Nintendo’s pre-Switch “consoles” arguably had poor performance-to-price ratios in terms of hardware.
Also, a PC doesn’t have the constraints of a mobile form factor and better cooling and can have better performance without the built in battery and screen. You just argued to me that a PC can be a console.
This all seems arbitrary to argue the differences.
While you can do that with a Steam Deck or Nintendo Switch, that was not their primary design. Its no different than plugging in a laptop to a TV with a wireless controller and gaming on that. That is not a console, it was not designed as such.
Additionally, the quality of gaming experience you get from a Switch is worse than on Steam Deck for intensive games, even for native Switch games sometimes. But the quality of games on the Steam Deck is worse than a purpose built game console like the Xbox Series X or PS5. Keep in mind the Steam Deck is 2 years newer than the Xbox Series X or PS5. While the experience may be comparable on some less intensive games, the console experience is objectively better.
Steam Deck and Nintendo Switch are not competition to Xbox or PlayStation. Valve and Nintendo don’t view them as such, and neither do consumers.
I don’t think anybody wants a monopoly, because it means the leader can stagnate, and honestly that’s already happened. Sony are getting complacent, the big releases are few and far between. We’re all getting less for our money, no matter what team you’re on.
I often buy multiple consoles in a generation, but I didn’t get the Xbox One or Xbox Series consoles, because there’s no reason to, and it’s not because I’ve got an expensive PC either, still being on a 1060. Being late to the game is fine, PS3 did that and ended up selling pretty much as many as the Xbox 360 in the end, but where is that spark from MS? They’ve gambled it all on Game Pass and I’m not sure you can run an entire gaming division on that, same as Netflix couldn’t compete with Hollywood without the box office money. The cloud growth just hasn’t happened for them. It doesn’t feel as good as local play, and I suspect it never will. A PS5 has hit pricing that isn’t really that expensive for fairly casual gamers, although the most casual went mobile ages ago and I doubt they’re coming back.
Xbox hardware is fine, there just isn’t any reason to own it. If it ran Windows and I could install my Steam library on it, I’d have got it on day one, but how does that make MS money? There’s even been noises about the next Xbox allowing Steam, although I don’t know how true that it is. I would guess the only way that can happen is if MS get a chunk of Valve’s money every time somebody buys a game through Steam for Xbox. It’s the only real feature that would get me to buy one right now.
I get journalists hate Xbox, but Xbox needs to exist as a consumer option.
I don’t understand, is this a thing? “All journalists hate Xbox” I mean. I’ve never heard this before. Like there’s a mandate that journalists have to hate the Xbox?
EDIT: I’ll eat the downvotes, I just want to understand what the fuck they’re talking about
Nah, it’s an obviously false take, because as you say, why would all journalists agree on this?
XBOX has been underwhelming for a while and journalists will report on that, and they will focus on those bad parts and certainly also sometimes make it sound worse than it really is, because it brings in clicks.
That can make it look like journalists dislike XBOX, but causality is simply the other way around.
Yeah the comment felt like bizarre astroturfing – Why would ‘gaming journalists’ specifically not want Xbox to succeed, but want Playstation to? Like somehow a Sony monopoly is great for… journalists? A very strange take.
XBOX has been underwhelming for a while and journalists will report on that, and they will focus on those bad parts and certainly also sometimes make it sound worse than it really is, because it brings in clicks.
I worked at Microsoft and I can assure you, they deserve every bit of hate they get. And it really is that bad. There was a point with the Xbox One where Sony was beating ‘us’ in every single market we were actively tracking except specific parts of the US. Yet we had directive after directive for clearly nonsensical ideas like targeting Japan for console sales.
I also worked (third party) with Sony and they aren’t much better, but they at least understand how to get their consoles bought. Microsoft hasn’t known how to do that since the 360.
Nintendo has shown they have no interest in making real console hardware
Ah yes, the no true Scotsman argument.
Nintendo doesn’t make hardware to compete with Sony and Microsoft, despite having the best selling console hardware all-time, among the current generation, and among several previous generations.
You don’t have to be a graphical powerhouse to compete with PlayStation and Xbox…
Nintendo is not competing with Microsoft or Sony, and that’s why they can sell more.
People arent choosing between Xbox, PlayStation, or Switch. Theyre choosing between Xbox or PlayStation, and also buying a Switch. That is not competition.
Gaming journalists sure want a Sony monopoly of gaming consoles, don’t they?
Despite the inflammatory headline, I don’t think that’s really the point of the article. It’s much less “why even bother”, and more “do they even know what they’re doing over there”?
Any hatred the writer has for Xbox seems to be focused on how Microsoft are running things, not letting the studios take chances or even make a bit of a dud game.
As a platform, the point of Xbox is supposed to be to make things people enjoy. But MS seem hyper-focused on insane rates of growth, more users, more subscribers, bigger profits. Anything that doesn’t fit that gets cut, regardless of how well it was received by fans or critics.
I don’t get the impression the writer hates Xbox, but is just frustrated that they’ve been making the same mistake over and over again, which has allowed Sony to dominate the console space.
eurogamer.net
Ważne