As long as it’s a 3xxx or 4xxx Nvidia card honestly its just as good as Nvidia now as long as you arnt being dumb and trying to use Debian or mint or something that has a massively out of date kernel on a new laptop.
I had a 3060 and the support for wayland was just terrible.
Loads of games didn’t work on proton or ran terribly.
Moment I switch to AMD on Linux I have not had any crashes, and games run out of the box with good performance.
Just my experience, there is no real reason why most people need nvidia GPUs on Linux. The vram is small, and prices often don’t compete well with AMD.
CUDA and other media stuff is usually a strawman as most people literally never it. If you need that desktop with SSH is much better value for money.
I’m choosing now between Framework laptop and System76 laptop. Both seems great, but System76 laptop seems to have a better quality judging by the looks of it?
I went with a Framework 16 and upped it to 48gb ram with the graphics extension. That thing is a powerhouse. I didn’t get it for gaming, but for design work. Still, it can play anything out now on the highest settings and is fully modular so I’m planning to be buried with this thing.
ETA: I also went the Linux route and don’t have any regrets.
I had a FW16 for about a year. I got fed up with the poor fit and finish, and utterly unreliable USB-A expansion modules.
System76 sure ain’t perfect either, at least my pangolin 15 leaves a lot to be desired between the shit trackpad, awful battery drain during suspend, and extremely limited BIOS config options. But it’s put together way better than a Framework 16 is
System76 sure ain’t perfect either, at least my pangolin 15 leaves a lot to be desired between the shit trackpad, awful battery drain during suspend, and extremely limited BIOS config options.
Makes sense, I guess it could be better with AMD chips
Not gonna lie, the concept “pushing the enemy back without killing it and having infinite ammo” sounds pretty interesting to me, like an Vampire Survivors but the enemies never die, it would be pretty hard!
Reminds me of that one enemy (in form of a ghost) in Phasmophobia, a Deogen (if my memory serves me correctly). Unlike the rest of the ghosts which only know your location based on any noise you make, any interactions you make with certain objects, or if you are in its line of sight… This ghost ALWAYS knows where you are, except it is really slow.
I love/hate the idea of an enemy slowly making it’s way over to you from across the map, and you can’t see it, but it can see you. * shudders *
It would be pretty neat to have a game based solely around prolonging your inevitable demise, trying to survive for as long as possible, maybe with roguelike features such as rng and differing runs.
I love the deogen. I was just playing phasmophobia last night and encountered one or two of them. I love that it flips the game on its head. Quite literally every other ghost wants you to hide somewhere, usually in a tight spot like a locker or behind a cabinet so the ghost can never get line of sight on you. But for the deogen that’s the exact opposite of what you should be doing, and if you don’t know that or don’t know it’s a deogen before it hunts, you’re screwed. Nothing gets my heart pumping like hearing a ghost rapidly running towards my exact location like Usain Bolt as I realize what it is and desperately try to escape my hiding place before it traps me.
Fun thing about the deogen is that it’s the second fastest ghost in the entire game, and then it slows down to be the slowest ghost when it’s extremely close to you. So you can’t safely hide anywhere, no matter how far away from it you are. By the time it’s near you, the deogen becomes slow enough to out-walk, but if you manage to back yourself into a corner? Good luck.
However, I haven’t played the game in quite a while (despite it being one of my most played games) since imho the devs did a great job of royally fucking up the game. With the direction they took it, I just get burned out when playing it after such a short time nowadays.
Bear in mind this example is one of a long list of things I believe they got wrong: I initially thought the equipment overhaul was a good idea, except after having played for over 100hrs I don’t feel like grinding to get all my old equipment back again, especially after so little has been done to make the core gameplay more interesting.
Anyway, sorry, rant over, used to be one of my all time favourite games.
I was also a big fan of the gear overhaul initially, until I saw how it was actually implemented and really came to dislike it. I just don’t see who it’s here for. It screws over newer players who are stuck with really poor gear, making the already punishing learning curve the game has significantly worse, and it screws over any experienced players by punishing anybody that actually wants to interact with the level prestige mechanic once they do get themselves to level 100. Meanwhile anybody who doesn’t prestige just permanently has even better gear than what previously existed and never needs to worry about the other tiers. And since there’s no reward for prestiging aside from a cosmetic badge, why should you interact with the system at all? Overall it was a poorly thought out and unbalanced update.
While some updates haven’t been great and some things desperately need to be reworked, I’ve still been really enjoying the game. Once you get to around level 40 and unlock all the original gear, you can largely pretend the gear overhaul never happened. The newer maps and map reworks are awesome (aside from the new-ish lighthouse map point hope, that thing sucks), and I don’t play frequently enough to get too bored of the basic gameplay loop. Playing on nightmare where you only get 2 evidence helps since it adds a bit more strategy to each round than just getting 3 pieces of evidence and leaving. The newly reworked media evidence is pretty fun too, where you get rewarded for getting videos and pictures of unique forms of evidence rather than taking 10 pictures of a pile of salt that somebody stepped in.
If you want any games for switch to work as intended, without a bunch of lag or any major fiddling to get that one specific game to work, switch/2 is sadly the only way to go.
As for the deck route, absolutely depends on various things. Is she okay with piracy and will she know? Do y’all plan on using it just for switch emulation or are there other games on other consoles/Steam/other storefronts that are gonna be emulated/installed? If yes to questions like that, deck would be the way to go. More bang for your buck due to not being limited to a single games ecosystem.
Also, another thing to think about, is that there are current, IIRC, Zer0 switch 2 emulators that can do much of anything, so you’d have to emulate the switch 1 version of games on something like Ryubing Ryujinx. Do you wanna wait for a switch 2 emulator that might not be able to run that less popular title you like because they’re focusing on the big triple AAA titles? Good to keep this in mind, IMO.
Hmm so I would say go with the switch 2 mainly because you mentioned money isn’t an issue. It’s going to be purely peace of mind as you’re not going to need to do any major troubleshooting later.
Alternatively just go with the steam deck and let her use it normally and (I assume as I’ve never owned a steam deck) it should just be plug and play the same as a switch.
Coming from experience, if it was me and my mom in the same situation, I would go with the switch 2 because I know there would be less stress involved overall. I normally do the tech help requests for my parents’ pc’s and phones, and it always surprises me how they can sometimes manage to break things or get themselves into a pickle.
From my experience if you have something working then its fine. I mean if you are going to add the games and add them to the steam menu so she just needs to click on them to play. If she is not expecting to go out and find games and such which I assume she is not given she could not with the switch.
Some games minimize and try to lock your mouse to the game if you alt tab out. Windowed mode makes it pretty much seamless, pain free. No difference I ever found, just easier to alt tab out and check a map, take notes, pause and watch a video.
I never saw a major performance difference, but being able to switch windows without the game possibly crashing is great. Especially in single player games, sometimes you just need to pause and check laundry, or check email. Alt tab and good to go.
That’s the benefit I use it for. Some games force minimize when you tab off and they can crash when you try to tab back to them.
There used to be a noticeable graphics performance boost to an app when in full screen mode, but that was back in Windows 7 days and may not be true any more.
I’m okay with a little chromatic aberration and vignette.
Why? It’s literally something that pro camera tools have added in-software fixes for to remove them. Like - if you’re simulating an old JVC vidicon tube camera and wanting to make something specifically look like an image capture device from a specific time, I get it, but otherwise, it just seems like a way to hide the fact that your graphics aren’t quite hitting the realism mark and you think if you obscure it a bit, players will think it looks more “real.”
I’m very aware, I’ve spent quite a bit of time over the years removing them from photography projects.
For vignette, it accomplishes a lot of the same thing in games as it does in photography in general: it is a subtle focus shifter. For some games - like some photos - I enjoy that little bit of extra emphasis on the center of the screen.
For chromatic abberation, i generally avoid it in photography, but it can be used for effect. I feel like that’s also true to a point in games. Over the top CA feels like trying to watch something without 3d glasses. A little bit on the fringes can give a smidge of retro (and, oddly, futuristic) style for effectively no compute cost. It’s definitely overused though, and I tend to turn it off more often than not.
Agreed on the “shifting focus” part for vignetting specifically - but everything else… outside of specifically tailoring to fit a particular “aesthetic” I think are crutches that are generally used to obscure an overall graphical presentation in order to work in a similar way to how squinting your eyes works.
I agree that highly stylized games like “Bodycam…”
…use things like a specific kind of grain, noise, distortion, aberration, etc. to create a highly appealing visual aesthetic designed to match an actual low-fidelity police body camera, but Battlefield and CoD have much less excuse in my book.
The camera aesthetic stuff only makes sense on things like the AC-130 killstreak in CoD where you’re emulating the on-aircraft cameras actually used in the real deal.
I’m not THAT familiar with the story of RDR2, but I think Rockstar tries to do their best to show that Arthur is a very flawed man who can switch between doing good things to doing bad things in a whim (but also depending on the player’s actions). It makes him feel more human.
The mission I’m describing is unavoidable. I won’t spoil it, but it has serious consequences for both Arthur and the plot. It’s the kind of art that really punches you in the gut.
Tying up clansmen and turning them into red mist on train tracks, feeding them to gators, or just setting them on fire sure never did get old though.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne