I use the arctis nova 7x wireless which I like, have good reviews, and are good for the price. Can’t speak much to other options but Rtings has reviews of headsets if you want to research there
I use them with both. Xbox is the odd one out. If you get the nova 7 or nova 7P, they’ll work with everything except Xbox (I think). The 7x works with everything including Xbox
The PAL version uses the original art from Japanese release. I think it even improves on it by having a white background, which looks more classy to me: gamefaqs.gamespot.com/pc/…/10236
Tried it with a Nvidia card. The graphics were oddly blurry and grainy, especially anything in shadows, no matter the settings. Couldnt get past that. I’m not going to play potentially dozens of hours of nausea simulator.
I loved the environments in RDR2, but holy hell, the missions’ persistent denial of player agency drove me up a tree. Railroading is annoying in the best of cases. I could tolerate it in The Last of Us, which limited the places I could go but offered a wonderfully engaging story in those places and never dropped a 10-ton FAIL anvil on my head for trying something creative. In an open world game (a genre that I like because I’m encouraged to find creative solutions) I find it unforgivable.
Kingdom Come: Deliverance drove me away for similar reasons. I like games where the challenge comes from learning how to work with available tools and moves, developing my skill with them, and figuring out how to use them most effectively. Making progress that way is satisfying. KC:D chose the polar opposite of that, interfering with my ability to control my character until I slogged through seemingly endless time sinks thinly disguised as “training” sessions. This mechanic had nothing to do with developing my skill as a player, but instead just arbitrarily denied me agency. I hated it, and since the reports I’ve read suggest that the sequel does the same, I won’t be buying it or anything else from those game designers.
I guess my point is just to let you know that you’re not alone. :)
I dropped KCD 1 after ~30 hours for the same reason as you, but at least KCD has some justification - the whole point of the game is to be an ultra-realistic simulation of medieval life, a roleplaying game in the truest sense of the word.
Your character starts out not even knowing how to read, even though you, the player, obviously do to interact with the GUI. He’s the son of a blacksmith who never would have learned anything else, so he, the character, has to spend time learning basically everything, even if you, the player, already have it figured out.
You and I think that design is unfun. Clearly, though, there’s an audience for it, as KCD 2 sold something like a million copies on launch day and instantly recouped their development costs.
Yes, I’m aware of that justification. I like the idea in principle, but it doesn’t hold water in this game, because the mechanics they used to simulate ultra-realism are not realistic at all. Picking up a weapon in real life doesn’t impose a state of bodily malfunction where you have about as much control of yourself as a blind drunk standing on one stilt. I’ve used swords and bows, and trained in a fair number of other physical skills. Even my very first time, there was never a point where I suddenly found my arms or legs failing to work. The most forgiving way I can describe this implementation would be to call it a ham-fisted attempt.
Clearly, though, there’s an audience for it
It seems so. If some people enjoy slogging through those mechanics, then I’m happy for them. I have better things to do with my time.
Also “a bit too long and some noticeable jank” but damn if I don’t get really into it sometimes. Had to switch to the easier difficulty after something like 25 hours of playtime because I’m not very experienced in these types of RPGs but it’s okay because there’s still some challenge there, just not enough to really actually worry.
As a gamedev I never saw this as a big issue. Just run Debian Oldstable on your build server, link whatever you can statically, and you are good.
(However, I am talking on a purely theoretical level here - we only released one Linux game, and that was before I joined the company. I will explain our actual reasons in a separate post.)
That would kinda mean you deliver every single dependency yourself, which kinda defeats the purpose of shared dependencies, which in turn proves my point that linux distros are fragmented to fuck. It also means you have to put actual effort into building your game for a userbase that was less than 1% before the steam deck came around.
So my point still stands - proton is the best thing that could’ve happened to linux gaming because it lets windows games run on linux with the dev putting only minimal effort - or even no effort - into making the game run on linux with near native performance. Hell, at times even with better performance.
Because for decades Microsoft has yielded to Linux’s superiority with unethical anti-competitive behaviour. E.g., it’s hard to compete with hardware that comes pre-installed with Windows.
Also for decades, Linux has had awful drivers for graphics cards (among other things) and godawful usability. It’s not like Linux would have taken over the desktop computer market in 1998. Have you ever tried installing a vintage distro? It’s a nightmare.
Not been my experience at all. Or am I misunderstanding and you’re saying that’s a past problem? Because I’ve used both AMD and Nvidia drivers on Mint and they’ve both been fantastic.
They’re a lot better these days, but I remember 15 years ago I had to spend hours in a command line just to get Linux to recognize my video card, much less utilize it properly. It’s definitely come a long long way but still far from perfect
That’s harder to implement. Suddenly you need to store that extra state somewhere and don’t mess it up. The last save should already have a timestamp and is immutable. A lot less likely to get bugs that way.
The state “the game is paused” is different from " the game is paused and saved". Sure that could be another key in some atate machine but like above: it’s the “not mess it up” part that is harder.
Plus all the lines to update the state, when the menu is closed, when the game is closed (i.e should it be true or false at startup), when the game is saved obviously.
That’s at least three more lines plus the one you mentioned for no extra value. And again it’s easier to screw it up e.g. while refactoring.
I think we write our code in different enough ways that we’re not seeing eye to eye.
Tracking the state of the game being paused, when the menu is open and when the game is saved can all be a single match statement on a current “game state” variable which just holds “running/paused/paused and saved/exit” and when it becomes exit, it checks the save time. Only 2 lines of code and adding an enumerated state to the variable to add this functionality. Since the variable is enumerated, it’s really difficult to mess it up when refactoring because if you can’t pass the wrong code or else your game doesn’t save or close
Ok, I mentioned a state machine in another sub thread. It’s not as bad if you already have a state machine.
It’s still adding more complexity though - again when the value is updated. You still need to change the state when saving. You need to decide which state to use when starting the game.
There is still risk of screwing that up when refactoring. And still the value is nearly none.
Regarding state mchines, it’s a complexity in itaelf to add random flags ro the state machine. Next time you want to add another flag you need to double all the states again, e.g. PAUSED, PAUSED_AND_SAVED, PAUSED_AND_MUTED, PAUSED_AND_SAVED_AND_MUTED. I would never add mute to the logic of the menu but that’s the pnly example I could come up with. Maybe you see my point there, at least?
Complexity being added at updating also feels wrong to me. Let me pseudo code some rust (just the language I know best off the top of my head right now) at you, cause it feels like maybe I’m just not understanding something that’s making this seem easier than it is.
<span style="color:#323232;">Enum Game_State
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Paused
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Paused_Saved
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Running
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Loading
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Exit
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="font-style:italic;color:#969896;">///Technically you could make Menu() part of the enum but I'd probably leave it elsewhere
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">Match Game_State
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Paused </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">=></span><span style="color:#323232;"> Menu()
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Paused_Saved </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">=></span><span style="color:#323232;"> Menu()
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Running </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">=></span><span style="color:#323232;"> Main_Loop()
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> Exit </span><span style="font-weight:bold;color:#a71d5d;">=></span><span style="color:#323232;"> Exit()
</span>
And then your other functions always return a game_state. You’re right that adding that return would be a huge undertaking if it’s not handled in the initial building of the game, but it’s a QoL for the user that’s easily maintainable and is therefore worth doing IMO. But these two things, defining the possible game states and then always routing decisions through that game state, makes this kind of feature relatively doable
I’m sorry I don’t getting your point . You start off by agreeing that you don’t like the extra complexity that the update statements give. Then do some pseudo code of something entirely different where we all already agree is not an issue.
Then at the end your conclusion is that it is totally feasible. Why? You still didn’t adress the problem of updating the state
My point was “are state machines really that complicated? Isn’t it just something like this pseudo code and a return value from your functions?”
Basically I feel like this is a 2 step process but you seem like you either know more than I do or have a different philosophy about how this would be implemented, so I want to understand what I’m missing
Use Nexusmods and their Vortex mod manager. It simplifies it a lot, though you may have to watch a quick tutorial video or two. It’s nothing that you won’t learn, though.
Certain other games may have other mod loaders just for them, that you can use. KSPs CKAN comes to mind, or Curseforge for Minecraft. A lot of games handle mods through the Steam Workshop.
In the case of using mod loaders most of the stuff you will have to do yourself will be limited to keeping mods updated, resolving conflicts, and managing load orders (where applicable).
You’re not missing anything. Heavy modding of older games PC can be a pain in the ass.
You can usually find a somewhat coherent and structured guide that will give you a step by step process, but will still be time-consuming (and there will likely be exceptions or outdated information).
The best option is to keep mods to minimum unless you know what you are doing and it’s a game that you play on a permanent basis.
Heavy modding of older games PC can be a pain in the ass.
Sometimes the older games are the easy ones to mod, and the new games make it intentionally difficult. Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, Quake, Deus Ex are all mod-friendly.
It can also depend on how much work the mod developer puts into making it easy.
(I notice you have an MiB as your profile pic and Deus Ex’s Liberty Island skybox as your profile banner lol)
I was so confused for so long here. I forgot that Men in Black were in Deus Ex. I was just like “How the hell does Tommy Lee Jones connect with this?!”
If it’s non-standard engine (“sourceport” in Doom terminology) with its own scripting infrastructure (like GZDoom) then sure. Vanilla and Boom compatible engines are kinda tricky, DeHackEd isn’t exactly the easiest modding approach. Mapping-friendly - for sure, but modding - less so.
bin.pol.social
Ważne