Nintendo is going to want a console they can keep standardized for a while without hitting hardware limits early. It’s one of the only major flaws of the Switch, and while it’s not entirely their fault, they know the type of direction devs want to move in. IMHO they will have listened in this regard.
I don’t expect it will run “on par with PS5” as some rumors have suggested, though.
Yeah I agree, the Switch family in general are mostly meant to play official games like Zelda, DK and Mario whose older incarnations were also designed for other small consoles that ran on battery power, and not-so-demanding third-party games that can be played without connection to power like Minecraft BE. They’re like a modern DS with a bigger screen that you can connect to a TV and play with detachable controllers, and never pretended to be anything more.
But the ps5 plays games in 4k .if i remember correctly 4k requires 16x compute power compared to 1080p ( on the gpu side ). So with dlss from 720p to 1080p it might be possible to match 4k ps5 . Alghtough it might be immposible with the games bound by cpu , unlike the ps4/xbox one generation the consoles this time dont have a completly dogshit CPU from the get go.
“But I promise that you’re going to be blown away by the promising I’ll be doing in the future. My promising will be authentic, intuitive, life-like and indistinguishable from the real thing. This is promising like you’ve never experienced before, and these are promises they will still sound assuring twenty years after they’re made. I’m so proud of the team for the work they’ve done on this and I’ve promised them a pay rise, holiday in Bora Bora and a blowjob from a $10000-a-night hooker with a mouthful of warm honey. That’s the kind of promises I’m talking about, promises that will change the way we think about promises and, if you have a moment, I’d like to make you some promises too…”
Being able to say this out loud is a big step. +1 emotional maturity. +1 admitting he’s got a problem.
I’ll not deny that he has passion, but someone really should have reigned him in. It only hurt the game when it inevitably never delivered. Who comes up with game features on the spot to the media? No respect for the people who actually have to make the game, sheesh.
Bungie 100% can remove the gun from people's inventories, but they won't. They're usually pretty hands-off on stuff like this, because your inventory is accessible cross-platform, but your purchased expansions are not. So they'll leave the gun in your inventory because they know that the possibility exists that some people may change their minds on their original purchase and re-buy the expansion for a different platform.
I’ve been using Vulkan in Linux with an AMD card. Seems mostly fine except the occasional black boxes during cut scenes (about 15% of the edge of the screen). I haven’t tried DX11 yet.
I'm also in Vulkan on Linux with an AMD card. I don't get those black boxes.
The main menu has terrible framerate, but everywhere else is acceptable through Proton (45-50). DX11 has great framerate on the main menu, but like 8-10 FPS ingame (my Windows partition can hold a steady 60).
I’m on Linux with AMD, but Vulkan is a crashy mess for me. Can’t keep the thing running more than a few minutes. It’s fine on DX11 (a few stutters here and there, but hasn’t crashed).
Yes which is why I chose Vulkan over DX11. But depending on the Vulkan implementation for a specific game, sometimes converting DX to Vulkan might function better.
Absolutely boggles my mind that they would even consider this? I can’t imagine the amount raised would come anywhere close to justifying the damage done?
My understanding is that the damage from this specific move will be minimal, because everyone that wants to develop for Xbox already has a devkit. This is mostly just Xbox acknowledging that they are barely moving devkits, and devkits are getting more expensive because of tariffs, so they may as well raise the price on the devkits because they are gaining no benefit from eating the cost.
Eh, not really. If it's not fun, I'll lower the difficulty or refund if this is not an option, I don't care.
I play all of my favorite games on the hardest difficulty because the challenges they throw my way are a big part of why I find them fun—why would I bother with higher difficulties if I'm not having fun?
Hmm… I think of difficulty, or lack thereof, as integral part of the fun. I think they're inseparable, essentially.
I don't really enjoy the process of learning and getting better at 3rd person shooters, for example, so I don't typically enjoy playing those on higher difficulties. If I pick one up, I know I'll most likely have more fun playing on lower difficulties because it eliminates a process I don't really enjoy. In other words, shooting shit is still fun, but I need the difficulty toned all the way down to enjoy it.
Conversely, I love learning the intricacies of combo systems of action games and figuring out how to exploit enemies and whatnot, so I have to play those on the highest difficulty to get the full experience and have the most fun.
Interesting, thanks! That’s not quite how I approach fun, or difficulty, in a game.
I’m happy playing on higher difficulties so long as the gameplay loop is interesting (to me), and that’s how I go about shmups for instance, gradually increasing difficulty as I start to “master” the game (as if), however if the “default” gameplay isn’t fun to me, lowering the difficulty is not going to help.
I think that comes down to the genre and game. I’ve definitely played games where I was enjoying the story and wanted to see its conclusion, but couldn’t be bothered with a boss rush in the middle of the game. In a similar vein, games with sudden difficulty spikes in the mid- to endgame portion might benefit from it.
At the end of the day, I’m a working adult, trying to fit in having some fun with all the other crap I need to do. I don’t have time for games that need me to treat them as a second job to get good enough to make any progress in them, but games with random difficulty spikes or boss rushes that just serve to pad out play time by making you grind for levels or the ideal equipment or skills/summons out of nowhere feel like an annoying bait and switch to me.
Right, I can see that. I tend to have less patience for (what I consider) annoying gameplay despite good stories, therefore I wouldn’t try lower difficulties if it’s a hassle to me.
I tend to move on / abandon games quicker than I would have done when I was younger, and I know what genres I tend to favour.
Artificially padded games are usually a pass for me too.
I don’t play too much in the way of action RPGs, but it’s definitely an annoying thing that tends to pop up in JRPGs, though less so nowadays. Still, I do appreciate being able to dial the difficulty down as an option if I’m enjoying a game, get 30 hours in, and run into one of those two issues. If it’s not an option, I’d just drop the game, but it gets annoying when you’ve sank in a month or so of free time, only for a game to pull that on you.
I like to set the difficulty high enough to where I don’t feel the game is too easy, but low enough so that I’m not getting frustrated and feeling like the challenge is bullshit.
eurogamer.net
Ważne