It's been a long time since that was the case though. Now you have to update the console, update the controller firmware, install the game, and update the game.
Sure, but they're approaching a convergence. PCs have gotten easier and consoles have become less streamlined. With something like the Steam Deck, it's even more blurred.
Steam is legitimately easier and faster to get games going on than my PS4 these days IMO. Library is laid out alot better and there's no signing in whenever I turn on a controller. Its still easier to do local multiplayer on PS4, but not by much.
and there’s no signing in whenever I turn on a controller
Can you not sync your account to a specific controller on Playstation? Xbox has that for a while, though the whole software experience has generally been Xbox’s strong suit imho
While only the Steam Deck has achieved massive success, it shows there are ways to reduce the prep time for PC gaming, to almost as little as modern consoles (since you do, ultimately, have to install drivers on console.)
Don't forget RISC-V, it's really the future i think. Anyone who doesn't want to live under the yoke of proprietary architectures, this looks to be the only alternative to the status quo.
If I was seeing RISC-V get widespread adoption in consumer-grade hardware, I’d be thinking about it (granted, having X86-64 and ARM on the market could make room for a third competitor compared to the 15-year x86 hegemony.) But I don’t see a push for that, and there probably won’t be unless RISC-V delivers better results than ARM. Keep in mind that you and I probably care more about CPU architecture than the average gamer.
I’m okay with this on the condition that that platform is PC.
You want developers to choose a specific set of hardware requirements and only develop games to target and work on that specific set of hardware specifications?
The context appears to be mainly about how having to develop for different consoles/hardware configurations/etc makes development harder. So, choosing PC as the "platform" in this context would be the worst possible option to choose.
I see where he's coming from, as when cross-play isn't available niche online games can die quickly and exclusives are annoying, but if there was only one platform holder, that status would quickly be exploited with high online fees and tighter controls of how games are purchased/resold.
Is this a single player game? Then cool, 100%, love it. Co-op? Probably fine, but I’d have some implementation questions.
Pvp? I ate the biggest backlash I’ve had on the Internet on another forum when I argued that players shouldn’t be able to unilaterally make the game easier for just themselves in a competitive game, and I’m still mad about it.
That’s probably fine. Like if you want to play with triple iframes you can play with other people that have triple iframes (or who said they’re ok with that). I just don’t think you should be able to adjust your iframes whenever you want. Like, not in the middle of a match you’re losing.
I don’t know how to solve match making if you have a lot of those settings. Like if you can change iframes, parry frames, max health, max stamina, max incoming damage, min outgoing damage, and so on, that’s an explosive set of variables. You’d be lucky to find someone with your exact settings. Which is maybe fine? Maybe most people would use the defaults.
But the last time I had this conversation, some guy was adamant he should be able to play with me even if he has his settings tweaked to be nigh indestructible.
When did games go from being something fun to do, to people getting so serious about them that they would rather fuck over a bunch of disabled people than lose a game?
Whenever I play competitive games I see people raging in the comments like every game, and it's usually people who aren't doing very good that round because they want to blame everyone else for losing. Idk why y'all are paying $60+ just to be angry the entire time. Fuck around and have fun, it's not that serious.
It's so bad you're STILL mad about a hypothetical situation that doesn't even exist. Spiderman 2 is single player. If it was competitive, and disabled people being able to play ruins your life sooo much, then don't play it. Crisis averted.
Yes, I do get upset when people act like disabled people needing accommodations is ruining their life. For obvious reasons. Disabled people had no accommodations in games for literal decades and suddenly able bodied people act like it's the end of the world when they start getting introduced. The difference is that some disabled people literally cannot play when you have a choice. And ranting, on multiple forums, about how accommodations will ruin your hypothetical competitive game that doesn't even exist yet!
And games are not the only scenario, I see a similar attitude in every instance where disabled people are granted accomodations.
You want accomodations to not exist in certain scenarios. Your comment was clear.
You’re not engaging with what I’m actually saying. I’m not saying accomodations are ruining my life.
It feels to me like what you’re saying is that “Accommodations” has an unbound scope. Anything and everything can be changed in the name of accommodations. Double your health in street fighter? Fine. See the other players hands in Poker. Sure. Turn on slow-mo in Quake9? Well okay.
And any of those things might be fine and fun if everyone playing agrees. Maybe you’re new at poker and I want to show one of my cards as a boost to you, the rookie. But for you to walk into a game and be like “yo I need to see your cards to play” seems egregious.
Maybe that’s not what you meant.
Maybe for you this is a “for me it was Tuesday.” You’ve possibly spent your whole life arguing with assholes like me who can just take their presumably abled asses and just walk away when it’s no longer interesting to them. I’m sorry for your struggles and injustices. You don’t really owe me anything.
I'm not sure what you're on about but he wasn't complaining about Spider-Man 2. He even said if a game is 1P, then he's fine with any settings a player wants.
His complaint was about competitive games and I think it's a fair complaint (albeit a bit off topic) I don't think it's in your (or anyone else's) purview to tell others what games are or aren't about nor how seriously they should take their games.
We have entire competitive (and, imo, friendly) communities centered around competition and the notion that the rules are the same for everyone.
You could give bullet time to one player while the other moves and controls slowly. Or you could give one player bigger iframes to sort of approximate it.
Like, for one player they’re invulnerable for a full two seconds after pushing dodge, but the other player is only invulnerable for a quarter second.
Lots of ways to try
But as someone else in this thread said, this was kind of me going off topic. Slightly related but not exactly what the article was about.
Don’t make me point to the sign with people standing on boxes in front of a fence.
This should be very easily solved with matchmaking lobby settings.
Anyway, most accessibility settings are either something every competitive player should be using anyway (reasonable color contrast settings, HUD tweaks for clarity) or things that only people who need them despately would ever use (remapping all buttons to be able to play using only a stick in the players mouth, because they have no hands).
This seems to me like a total non-issue. And in the very few cases it is, the ranked lobbies can just diable that setting.
The backlash was probably because for you and I a harmed pvp experience is a “could happen” while for a bunch of gamers the lack of accessibility is a daily undeniable part of their reality. For some people, games are a critical sanity-saving retreat from the rest of their life. Let’s let them have their tweaks outside of ranked play.
I don’t have problems with control changes, subtitles, HUD stuff, all the things that are typically considered accessibility. I reject the idea that any arbitrary piece of a multiplayer game can be unilaterally changed in the name of accessibility. Which is maybe not a take any reasonable person has., but it’s one I’ve encountered.
But your last paragraph is probably right in that for them it was an emotionally charged “every day I deal with this bullshit” and I was coming off as “yeah but like what if i’m mildly inconvenienced one day?”.
I think the only way that could possibly work is if all manufacturers followed the same specs. That way games can be developed for all platforms equally.
3DO tried this, and failed spectacularly. Any other way would stifle competition though, which is bad for everyone.
I’m confident there’s a way to make it work. 3D Printers operate with this model for the most part (thanks Jeff Prusa!)
Effectively, console manufacturers should agree on some kind of standard architecture, which, to be very realistic and blunt (apologies as this isn’t necessarily the tone of the post, but I like trying to make things work in some way), as long as Nintendo is in the console game, it’s gonna be a bit difficult (unless we just let them do whatever they want console-wise and have the others create some kind of standard home console arch). As someone who is dipping their toes into game development, that is something I would love to see.
Xbox One/Series S/SeriesX and PS4/5 are x86 PCs, Switch is an ARM phone.
So, in the lowest level they are pretty out of the shelf hardware. Electronics are getting way to complicated to invest in the development of custom hardware architectures for a single product.
You take a commonly used architecture, fork an Operating System that you have access to, bundle as many libraries as makes sense and call it a day. No one is going to use weird quirks of the hardware except if you make some deal with Unity or Unreal.
Certainly, I myself am on a Linux machine with a 1070Ti and a Xeon 1650 processor that’s never left it’s socket since it was placed in there in some factory. I would guess it’s somewhat rare to have a machine such as this because it was originally meant as a workstation (I can tell because the door has handles on the inside that make it an effective shield), and I would guess anyone who does have this set up will have Windows installed on it.
That being said, differences in software between Windows and Linux is slowly becoming irrelevant with the continued development of proton and the various FOSS alternatives (i.e. GIMP replacing Photoshop). For the most part, the only differences these days are certain games from certain studios that for whatever reason decided not to check a box that says “Yes, I want this to work on Linux.” This of course disregards any specialist software that was only ever developed for Windows, which I’ve read numerous examples of.
It’s a different model entirely, most copies of windows sold will never have a game installed on them bar the pack-ins. No one is buying a console to do spreadsheets.
I’m amazed everyone seems to have forgotten the open nature was an Achilles heel for the 3DO model, then it occured to me that the console is 30 years old and I’m even older lol.
The fact is that the console market works how it does, advanced tach at reasonable prices, because the platform holders make money on an ongoing basis from each user. Getting rid of that model will mean consoles selling for the same price as equivilent specced PCs at launch.
I really want this for a lot of games. GTA5 became this absolutely beautiful spectacle of a game once I had the ability to control the flow of time. Something beautiful about launching a rocket and watching it crawl to its destination under the twinkling sunlight, past the unsuspecting bypassers who barely have time to register that something is up. Breathtaking game.
Linux was so unable to handle my 3 Monitors (granted, all with different Resolution and refresh-rate, but still) that i had to switch back to Windows today.
gnome-shell started crashing, Firefox and Gnome-Web started crashing for whatever reason. it was a Mess.
Some of that is on GNOME. I had to swap back to KDE after a couple years on GNOME due to lack of VR compatibility. GNOME is good for newbies and productivity, but completely unusable for gaming.
No offence, gnome is great, but there are many inconsistencies on the lover level, I wish it was figured out once and for all. It applies to big DEs like KDE and etc too.
Never had that issue, your experience may vary based on your hardware and software. I use Arch, sway (wayland), AMDGPU, multiple monitors with mixed refresh rates, everything works great.
NixOS with Gnome Wayland, a 4K 60hz TV, a 144hz WQHD and a 60Hz 1080p Monitor
it would often happen that one Screen would just freeze. my Web Browsers would just crash, especially if i was opening a Video.
and the Gnome-Shell itself would crash and put me into the Login Screen.
sometimes the whole Computer would crash and become unresponsive and not even alt+ctrl+n would help anymore
i don't really like XOrg, it just always feels inferior to Wayland or even Windows.
which is why i am currently using windows until [the Problems get fixed | i upgrade my PC (to an AMD GPU)]
They invented these things called reading glasses, have you heard of them? Anyway, PC mouse and keyboard is king, but we're talking console format here i think, and a PC console is better than a walled garden console.
Wow, that's a kind of dismissal that only those who have no idea how bad it gets can wield. Reading glasses help with clarity, but clarity is not the only issue with old eyes and other visual impairment. Sometimes you just plain need things bigger.
One day you'll look back on this exchange and cringe at the kind of person you used to be. Be better. Accessibility is important.
Signed, someone who's needed full-time prescription glasses for 35+ years and only recently started having to read small print on food and medicine containers with the zoom on my phone camera.
Interesting to see this particular addition. Handy for the players with slower reflexes, utterly useless for speedrunners (unless it messes up with physics somehow)
I also wonder how will achievements be managed while the accessibility turned on. Plenty of people are out there, vocally complaining about “handing out the platinum” to people “that do less effort than I did to earn it”.
Some games have separate achievements for separate difficulty levels. I can see how any approach will leave some people annoyed, though. I don’t care much about achievements (in 40 years I don’t think I’ve 100% a single game) so I don’t really have a dog in the race.
I hope so. As someone who will use the accessibility features, I don’t mind separate badges at alll. I don’t need the same badge as a speed-runner. I just want to play the game.
I’m not an achievement/trophy hunter personally but I can see some people’s issue there. The whole point of them is to indicate you’ve done something particular in game. If it’s just reaching a point in a story or whatever no big deal, but if it’s something that requires some skill, having it available when you can turn off the need for all those skills does undermine the system a bit.
I used to be one of those people who thought that it was unfair that they were handing out the achievements for “less effort,” 'til somebody pointed out to me that it isn’t for less effort. Somebody who needs accommodations would be playing a harder game than somebody who doesn’t at default settings. Their difficulty curve is steeper. Accomodations are a way of bringing the difficulty curve more in line with what a non-disabled player would experience.
And besides - most people aren’t going to want to completely ruin the game for themselves by sucking out any semblance of difficulty. Most people are still gonna play the game in a way where they get challenged. And even if they do, who cares? That doesn’t devalue the work that you did, you know? You still put in that effort yourself, so you can still feel secure in it.
Not coming after you in particular, just talking on a couple of the general points you brought up.
Game platforms… I probably shouldn’t say this, but I wish there was only one," Yoshida said, translated by IGN. "It would be better for both the developers and the players.
I think if he meant one standard like DVD and companies like Sony or Microsoft would make the dvd player. Other companies can join in. We would have choice and competition. And the one game would work the same on any device.
Not even, you still have to consider different components and operating systems, sometimes even what versions of the OS people are running since it’s not always cross compatible.
Then who gets the licensing costs for the Dev kits? Who gets the 30% cut of the digital store? Who gets the cut of accessories sold? Each game sold? Who’s responsible for updating the OS?
The console market works how it does because they sell the tech at a loss and make up money on the ongoing sales. The 3DO tried the open source model in the early 90s and ended up with ridiculously pricey consoles as all the manufacturers needed to make their profit upfront. Eventually, there will be no price difference between a console and a PC if equivilent specs.
Ah yes, more monopolies in the already completly broken gaming sector. Thats surely gonna help. I know he didnt mean it but I dont see how this could be a good idea. He means open plattforms and pc already exists.
ign.com
Najstarsze