Putting Peak devs on any moral pedestal is wild to me, did we forget that they put a backdoor in every lobby with Bingbong? Because no it’s not ok for devs to being able to just join any lobby and spy on it’s player.
scrolled past this a couple times thinking it was an opinion column about how the ideal dev behavior is approving of people pirating their games. finally remembered the game name.
It was pretty bad for a long time, but once they started letting users make their own hats and body models and shit, it got absurd. At least the games are usually just ripoffs, but the user-made catalog is just full of straight up model rips. I don't understand how they're not getting sued to oblivion for openly making money off of copyrighted material like that.
Indie developers are not immune to being bad people or making bad choices.
Saying “indie devs keep being the best devs” gives the impression that people can automatically trust all indie developers, which I am cautioning against. While it may be true right now that most indie developers are more likely to be “better” than AAA developers, that is not always true and can always change very rapidly.
Or is it just the ‘humans fighting giant machines’ part that they’re likening to Shadow of the Colossus Metal Gear Solid Horizon Zero Dawn?
Jokes aside, the standard of “could confuse consumers into mistaking one for another” was meant to prevent things like essentially typo-squatting in product names, e.g. going and making Orao cookies, instead of Oreo (which is why Oreo was able to copy Hydrox).
It wasn’t meant to just be about aping a concept or art style. No one would actually mistake “Light of Motiram” for “Horizon: Zero Dawn”.
Even if it was ripping on the other two games crossed out: Sony owns (or partially owns) those, too. They’re not suing over those games because… They’re theirs.
I agree with your latter paragraph but not the former. I’m really not liking these overbroad IP claims. This is almost worse than the Nintendo/Palworld stuff, which was already pretty bad.
Tencent may also be a villain, but if Sony gets its way here, it will be bad for games and other forms of expression.
It’s gonna depend on the game. It reads like it’s a system setting that games can read and adjust their resource demand. Like a game boots up and checks if power saving is turned on and if it is, renders at a lower resolution or something like that. The system software will probably do that as well.
That seems like a great idea. Now that so many games are much less demanding on your gaming machine than others (playing a Phoenix Wright game, or Stardew Valley, or Minecraft), holding back a bit of power makes a lot of sense. If implemented right, I imagine you wouldn’t see any effect from this on most games.
It is arguable how much it is needed if games/libraries are coded “correctly”.
If a game is not resource intensive it won’t consume a lot of resources. This is why people who don’t understand power supplies might pop a breaker if they boot up the least AAA game but won’t have issues playing Stardew and the like. Or why you can get a few hours out of some games on the Steam Deck and MAYBE an hour with others.
If this is meaningfully effective then it speaks to something with the underlying Sony libraries (I forget the technical term) space filling resources. It sees memory is free so it uses memory and so forth. Which is pretty common with a lot of database/queuing software and why good practices tend to be restricting those with VMs.
Nah. Fuck the remnants of polygon (buncha scabs) but I think they are right that this has to do with setting a threshold/target for a potential handheld SKU. Basically the same thing MS had with the Series X vs S.
Just to provide a bit more. A common way of thinking of it is you have a static and a dynamic energy cost. Running the CPU at all costs a certain amount of power (static). But doing actual work on it costs more power on top (dynamic). So a completely idle chip is just the static and a balls to the walls run is static and 100% of the dynamic.
You can potentially turn off parts of chips to reduce the static cost (e.g. run with 4 cores active instead of 6) but that tends to require significant hardware support. And… most literature on the subject tends to e that it is still better to just run until the proverbial sweat runs down your crack because you’ll consume less power than if you had run lower for longer.
I wonder how much of it is mismanagement on behalf of Microsoft itself, and how much of it is small-time devs suddenly getting more budget than they’ve ever seen before and deciding to get super ambitious with their next project and then having to scale it back when they can’t actually handle the project?
It’s what happened with EA and Anthem. Bioware suddenly got a shitload of money, couldn’t hack it, had to scale back the project, and it all fell apart.
AAA devs are finding out there’s no such thing as infinite money doesn’t mean there are no good games. Look around and you might just realize they’re actually the least interesting content out there. There are more games coming out per/day than at any other point in history. Take some initiative and you’ll find something great.
Yeah, remember when we had a proper alternative to twitch that had a better & faster Streaming Protocol called Mixer. Which was actually focussed on Gaming ??
Yeah it was run by Microsoft & then they killed it.
Then Glimesh revived it in a way& now it’s dead too. Shame, it was OpenSource too
polygon.com
Gorące