Players will be able to toggle between the new and previously existing visuals of Minecraft with the simple press of a button, meaning a classic look can be maintained by those who desire it.
thank goodness, shaders are pretty but I am massively suspect to nostalgia bias and I do not want to dedicate performance to shaders if my computer cannot handle it
I have to say, I was pretty neutral on this coming in, but reading all the people posturing anger while clearly not having any awareness of what the game is supposed to be or even reading the article is getting kind of annoying.
“In terms of the Final Fantasy that I think is the ‘most complete’; I believe Final Fantasy 6 comes close, and does stand out above the other Final Fantasies, especially because it was the last Final Fantasy to use pixel art in all of its visual expression,” Sakaguchi said.
I’ve got a 1660Ti, and it’s not perfect but smooth enough to play med settings on 1080p. The biggest thing holding me back was VRAM, so I’m interested how they address that on the older consoles, with an eye toward better performance for me.
Sounds like you just didn’t notice/remember the problems in that case. There was/is performance issues that will show up regardless of your hardware setup. “Runs fine on my pc” is simply not true, unless your pc runs on magic.
I mean if you want to invalidate my lived experience, sure. Played on release on a 5600X, RTX3070 and 32GB of RAM, 1080p, almost everything maxed out. Open areas on Koboh saw a drop to mid-40 fps, but other than that, I had one hard crash and no bugs I noticed.
I had the same experience with pretty much the same hardware. I played right after launch and had one or two crashes and a few stutters here and there, but otherwise I found it to be a surprisingly stable game, especially considering the wildly negative press it was getting at the time.
Nothing wrong with not noticing stutters, on the contrary you’re probably lucky to not notice that kind of stuff. However when the problems are documented to be hardware independent and shows up on far more powerful hardware than your own, it’s not a case of “works fine on my computer”.
Something like shader compilation stutter will still cause issues for the top end CPU in 10 years time for old poorly designed UE5 games.
People don’t like being confronted and told they’re objectively wrong. It’s not a new phenomenon that people report not experiencing problems that we know all systems, regardless of computing power, encounter when playing a given problematic game. And people get defensive when told they just didn’t notice it.
Some stranger’s 5600x doesn’t randomly have the hardware to compile shaders at 10x the speed of top of the line CPUs. A game that suffers from shader compilation stutters will do so on all systems. To say it didn’t stutter for you means either that:
The game never compiled the shaders
You already had the shaders pre-compiled, which isn’t a thing on normals PCs
You never noticed
You’re lying
It’s impossible to avoid for games that suffer from it.
I suppose I’m somewhat fortunate to have been a poor bastard for most of my life. 25fps with moldy potato settings was just fine, as long as the game didn’t crash or deep fry the CPU, so I’m not as sensitive to the occasional drop below 60fps and don’t feel slighted when I have to turn some settings down. Though I can understand being incensed when you’ve poured thousands into a bleeding-edge gaming rig that’s supposed to handle anything at 4k, maxed out and a stable 120fps and it’s the game itself dragging your experience down.
But the stutters weren’t the only problem people reported early on. There were cries of the game being unplayable, on account of endless bugs, visual glitches and repeated hard crashes. Worst I got was the normal mapping on Cal’s face getting real weird in certain lighting conditions. That’s hardly game-breaking.
I’m somewhat insensitive to it myself but shader compilation stutter is something that is measurable and reproducible so there aren’t any room for arguments around it.
Other problems, yeah they may be system dependent although something like animation rubber banding I suspect would be the same across systems, though hard to identify if you aren’t experienced.
I played it on my RTX 3070 shortly after launch, and while there were certainly some stutters here and there and the very occasional crash, for the most part it actually ran fine. I think the poor quality of the PC port has been seriously overblown. Granted I don’t care much about sustaining insanely high frame rates, but the game itself was amazing on its own, and even better having played and enjoyed the first one. Well worth any remaining technical glitches.
Well there are still a decent amount of games that comes out as closed beta before going public so there’s definitely a market for it but reading irdeta anywhere always stings a little
I don’t follow. Some games do come out as irreparable buggy garbage, get terrible reviews, and nobody of sound mind buys them. Other games come out with a genuinely fun product, and as a result of player engagement, the developer decides to add more - and nobody of sound mind is then claiming they “released it half finished”. Meanwhile, early leaks are always buggy because the bugfixing and polish phases come late in development.
So what does any of that have to do with justifying leaking?
The titular arguments about game leaks: that would crush our sales as it shows the version of our product not on par with our quality standards and our vision. When we see how games from Ubi\EA\Beth\etc got released this raw and untested, this argument gets rekt. Digital releases and updates, forever-beta products, raw indies and many other things enabled AAA studios to do the same and get no repercussions, but they’d still bitch if their game is leaked earlier even if they ship undercooked product.
It’s rational to assume if you play leaked pre-release, you have a deficient product on your own terms. Like Diablo 2 remaster that still has LAN play before this P2P solution was killed. It’s on gamers to be that stupid to review-bomb games based on alpha, beta versions. It’s fair if it’s a contemporary comment, but not a final judgement with a youtube title GAMENAME FUCKING FLOPS - MY FIRST UGLY MOMENTS WITH THE GAMENAME. Clickbaity, unfair and tastes like piss.
You expand this conversation to games-as-a-service mode, that is a very different beast. I like seasons and regular updates to a polished games. I dislike games who defacto employed first players as beta-testers who paid money for that.
And I like leaks, not for me being a pirate, but for seeing what’s under the hood and how things changed for my favorite titles like Stalker, the game that has a very weird development cycle and had many traces of feautures devs either couldn’t realise or didn’t have time to do right.
I’m tired of every game being spoiled if you happen to engage with any amount of social media because of leakers. I’m okay with that not happening anymore. You can wait a week.
I doubt that’s got much to do with anything. Palworld is a pretty standard survival early access thing whose only distinguishing feature is that they’ve somehow evaded Nintendo’s lawyers until after the release window.
Maybe they sent the cease and desist to the wrong address, like there’s an 87 year old Japanese woman wondering what this strange letter is she received and what she’s done wrong.
This fuck up is entirely of Rocksteady’s own making. It might review amazing, but gamers have utterly soured on live service bullshit. The Arkham games were gamer’s games. They can’t just fob this off on us like they can with CoD or FIFA.
Trailer looked interesting to me. Last performance of Kevin Conroy as Batman too, if I’m not mistaken. The Arkham series are part of my favorite games. Was hoping this would’ve been a decent continuation of that.
Yeah, I didn’t last thirty minutes into the show. It’s just ads, bad jokes, and more ads. It doesn’t celebrate games, it celebrates capitalism and I just don’t care.
ign.com
Ważne