I like how 8Bitdo makes both conventional controllers with pro player features (think 8Bitdo Ultimate) and experimental ones like this. Their 8bitdo Lite was less cumbersome than Micro, but had dual D-pads in place of analog sticks as an experiment.
right! i don’t really understand who is buying this, but i appreciate that they experiment with these products that have at most a niche audience. Some toddler out there is stoked about this controller.
Some people like to keep a tiny controller like this in a purse, small backpack, or pocket to game on the go. I don’t think many people use this at home.
I know it’s not the most experimental thing they do, but I’m still grateful for the simple SNES-shaped controllers with just the added analog sticks and triggers. This form factor is still one of my favorites. Button placement is perfect, plus they’re light and compact.
Okay so after seeing the bot TLDR and the other comments, I actually went and read the article. It’s a bit wishy washy as to why and mentions RAM could be the issue for S consoles.
When I read the headline I thought it meant it was also not viable for PCs either, which doesn’t seem to be the case at all. Most PCs have at least 16GB ram these days.
Why are people upset at all? I don’t get it. I actually think this is good, it will either force Microsoft to change their policy with consoles and/or release a line that can compete with PS. Or else. Meanwhile PC is still an option.
It’s been a while since I did Xbox memory mapping (One X) but IIRC there is approx 2GB of ram withheld by the system, and then an additional one or two can be recalled by the system for the purposes of running things like background downloads, party chat, video chat. That means that when your game goes to cert it’s checked to be performant under max OS load; so 6GB. This causes lots of issues (and is a pain as even MS’s analytics indicated this was a use case that appeared almost never. From what I have heard since, these TCRs/XRs/FTCs having changed much.
When I read the headline I thought it meant it was also not viable for PCs either, which doesn’t seem to be the case at all. Most PCs have at least 16GB ram these days.
Also keep in mind that PC doesn’t have unified memory. So there’s usually at least 8GB of VRAM in addition to whatever amount of main memory you have.
I don’t think anyone is upset? Xbox players are of course disappointed because they want the game but Larian have been totally fair and upfront about everything.
Microsoft should really re-evaluate their policies here though I agree. I feel like split screen could be an exception to the rule specifically.
They literally didnt finish episode 3 because they felt they had nothing new to show, they said all this in the documentary. They didn't want to just make more of the same. If they are making Half Life 3 (highly doubt it, as Tyler McVicker just chats shit to try and stay relevant), it's because they finally have some new tech or ideas they want to play around with, like as you said with Alyx.
Better will happen. Cheaper than Meta selling the Quest 2/3s at a loss for $300 because they bank on the walled garden of the Oculus app store for profit? Rather unlikely.
Especially now that every VR headset seems to be a standalone and the simple “HDMI cable to a PC” doesn’t really seem to exist any more, so you have to pay for the mandatory integrated gaming tablet as well.
I’m not sure I believe that Valve ran out of ideas for HL3. That’s clearly the image they want to project, and maybe even what they tell themselves, but judging from the ideas they did have for Episode 3 they showcased in that documentary, there was more than enough to justify releasing a game. Certainly there was as much or more new stuff than there was for either EP1 or 2. I think it’s much more likely they simply decided their other projects at the time–CS:GO, DOTA 2, even TF2–had way more moneymaking potential. And I mean, they were right! They made a ton of money off of lootboxes and cosmetics for their multiplayer titles. I don’t think Steam had totally taken over the market yet, so they were hedging their bets on multiplayer microtransactions.
I dunno. The whole “it needs to be new” philosophy they constantly espouse to hasn’t really been true at least as far back as Portal 2. Even Alyx wasn’t particularly revolutionary as far as VR titles go. Maybe doing that type of design was new to Valve, but the only standout features that distinguishes Alyx from other games are the graphics and the (genuinely very good) grabbity glove object pickup system. Pretty much everything else is several steps behind other VR shooter games in the name of Accessibility™, from movement to weapon selection to the painfully dumb AI.
They didn’t run out of ideas. The movement FPS genre is alive and well for a reason, even today: there’s lots to be done. They just lost interest in it themselves, and I believe the reason for that is primarily monetary.
There's plenty of "it doesnt need to be new" in the industry, I think it's refreshing Valve take a different approach. If none of them felt like they could continue the series without sacrificing quality or they just lost interest then there is nothing wrong with them stopping it. Yeah it sucks for fans who wanted more, but a good franchise being halted is better than one being milked.
I dont think they care about money at all, there's probably loads of projects started and stopped internally at Valve, it's how the company runs. They could print money by releasing a new Half Life game, they know that, it's just not something they want to work on right now.
They do often talk about “it needs to be new,” but for the most part the things they release don’t actually follow that philosophy. Artifact was trying to follow the likes of Hearthstone. CS2 is a glowup of CS:GO. DOTA2, League. Deadlock is the closest they’ve come to something genuinely innovative in at least a decade, but even that is still following on the heels of MOBA/FPS hybrids like OW and Paladins, just taking more elements from MOBAs.
And the “not caring about money” thing wasn’t true in 2008. They were probably getting to that point around 2012, as Steam began to turn into a money printer and their microtransaction games took off, but that wouldn’t have been until after HL3 had been cancelled at least once. At some point Valve talked about the difficulties in selling Portal 2 (I think it might have been in the dev commentary? Idk it’s been years) and one of the points they bring up was how even a huge success like that game wasn’t living up to their other titles. They tried to implement microtransactions with the co-op mode, but they learned lessons about how that model only worked in bigger multiplayer games. One of the big stories they tell in both the HL1 and HL2 documentaries were the troubles they ran into with funding, and I guarantee they were not looking to repeat those experiences by continuing work on a game that had far less potential for return on investment. Again, that might have changed by 2012, but by then the momentum was already gone.
I’ve heard people say they won’t make HL3 until the next big leap in gaming is here.
1 was with us into “true 3D” era
2 was with us into physics engines
Alyx was with us into VR gaming.
3 will be with us …?*
I’m excited to find where we’re going. Gaming has been pretty stale for a long time. Sure we’ve had plenty of games that have got very clever with what we have, but we haven’t had a major leap in a long time, they’ve just been getting a bit more polish and shine each year. Short of deep-dive VR I honestly don’t know what could be next.
*Possibly actual AI? A world filled with characters that are actually intelligently responsive rather than just following a set of predefined behaviour patterns? Vortigaunt teammate that learns from you? Thinking about where we’re at technologically I have been wondering how long until AI is ready for implementation in games. Maybe this is it?
As Gaben put it in the recent valve doc, moving the story forward wasn’t a good enough reason to put out a new Half Life. The series has always been about pushing technological innovations, and they just felt stumped on how HL3 was going to do that.
People like to claim valve doesn’t do anything anymore, but I legitimately feel like PC gaming is the best deal for gaming right now, handily beating out console and mobile, and that is in large part due to valve.
Their flat internal structure hasn’t been perfect, but on the bright side it didn’t result in them pumping out what the gaming industry would have viewed in retrospect as yet another obligatory entry in an FPS series. Valve’s intention was to let smart people solve hard problems in the gaming space, and IMO they have always done that, it just so far hasn’t resulted in a HL3.
I was a bit disappointed by Quake II RTX, which felt like an engine hack with nothing more. This looks like the proper remaster we’ve been waiting for.
Love the inclusion of the Nintendo 64 port, like how it was also included with the Quake I remaster.
There are Android tablets that are much cheaper than the Switch, more powerful, more battery efficient. Also, play games better.
You’re not really suggesting that playing mediocre android games on a touchscreen tablet is the same market as a handheld gaming device with controllers
Android has a couple high-profile indie games like Stardew Valley and some rare ports of older games, that’s it. I wouldn’t call it very good. and unless you’re willing to shell out $150+ for a great telescopic controller there’s no way playing on the tablet would be comfortable.
The mobile gaming market is leagues larger than every other market combined. That doesn’t mean the games are even remotely comparable to console games.
It’s an entirely different target audience. Mobile games are focused on quick sessions and design patterns designed to encourage spending money on microtransactions. Games made for the traditional gaming market are mostly designed for longer play sessions with more mechanically complex gameplay. I as well as many others prefer the latter.
Nintendo’s store is full of shovelware, but at least you’ll find more traditional games than just ports of indie hits. Or, buy a Steam Deck and enjoy something better than both.
To me, this is one of the funniest things in gaming culture right now.
I mean, have you looked closely at most Nintendo releases lately? They often feel like glorified indie games. They just happen to have big-budget marketing that indie developers lack.
Meanwhile, people act like Nintendo is some untouchable giant of innovation. Let’s be real: when was the last time a Mario game genuinely pushed boundaries? Nowadays, most releases are cash grabs riding on nostalgia and brand recognition.
No one, and I mean no one, is out here mistaking Mario Kart World for a visually groundbreaking, ambitious masterpiece like Black Myth: Wukong.
Maybe instead of throwing shade at indie devs, you should appreciate that indies often deliver fresh, daring experiences Nintendo no longer risks taking.
Which part of my comment was denigrating indie devs? Indie games are great. Android gaming is currently not.
If I’m looking for a good non-mobile game, I don’t go looking in the mobile game store. I go looking on PSN or PC, where the focus is on the kind of game that wasn’t designed as a phone-first experience.
The fact that Android has some good traditional games or ports of indie gems isn’t something inherent to Android. The overwhelming majority of those games were on PC or console first.
Android doesn’t just have ports of good indie games, it’s got lots of indie games that originated on mobile first – only later ported to console or PC.
Examples: Alto’s Adventure, Monument Valley, Endurance, Désiré.
If you’re unaware of these games, it’s not because Android as a platform sucks for gaming. It’s because discoverability is simply bad.
The OP is really blowing smoke up Android’s ass when it comes to the quality of native Android games. Most “top” mobile games are freemium crap riddled with microtransactions.
What it does have, however, is emulators. Including one for the Switch itself. Paying $350 for decade-old hardware and $80 for games is just bad value compared to a $300 used S21 and $0 games.
Oh, there’s no doubt about that. I’m not disagreeing that Android has some good-looking games. The problem is that games like GRID Legends Mobile are the exception, not the rule.
The Switch is crap, yes.
The Play Store is also overwhelmingly crap, though.
If you exclude all of the mobile games from both stores, the Switch simply has a better catalog of games.
Android’s problem isn’t lack of good games. Nor is it performance of hardware. It’s discoverability.
But really, that’s also the problem of every storefront. Steam too has a lot of legendary games. But they’re also hard to find because shitty asset flips are so abundant.
If discoverability was better, I’m sure Android would get way more ports of good games. With the way it is right now with shovelware and Google pushing microtransaction-riddled crap over one time purchase games, though, it’s treated as a second-class platform because it’s not nearly as profitable as other platforms.
Cyberpunk 2077 isn’t a fair comparison since the original Switch never had it. We’re comparing the original Switch to Android, not PC or PS5 to Android.
The problem with demanding exact “equivalents” is that it feels dismissive—like you’re rejecting games without giving them a real chance. Instead of chasing direct counterparts, focus on finding great games that stand on their own merits.
You’re literally making vague, empty demands and acting like I’m failing you. 😂
Until you can actually put words to what “caliber” means—like “this game needs that feature”—your whole argument is just entitled whining dressed up as critique.
Try again when you have a point. Until then, it’s just hot air.
I’ve seen this act before—you come in dismissing everything based on vague, shifting criteria you refuse to define. Why? Because it lets you move the goalposts whenever the facts don’t fit your narrative.
Until you actually lay out concrete criteria instead of hiding behind empty words, all you’re doing is wasting oxygen with hot air.
If we’re going by piracy logic then you can buy a $200 used Switch and hack it to download games for free. I genuinely don’t think a phone or tablet would ever be a good experience. nobody is going to play with touch controls, it doesn’t let you play games on the TV, the emulator has compatibility issues and bugs, not to mention how most phones throttle hard when they get warm. I’m not buying this discussion at all.
There is also dead cells, slay the spire, monster train, disable immortal, etc.
However, those are also all playable on switch too. Technically you can emulate the switch on android, but I think this brings up the biggest flaw in gaming on android; you’re either emulating or streaming for most good games.
I’ve been debating which console I might want to get for awhile now and this may have been the final straw pushing me towards the PS5. Haven’t been this excited about this game in a long time and there are several other exclusives that look amazing too.
I’ve been an Xbox Guy™ since the 360 launched, but I have a PS5 this generation. I don’t want to shill it too hard but the exclusives are great, I’m glad I switched.
I mean the whole point that xboxers were making when the ps5 was released was ‘but gamepass!’. Now that ps also has their ‘game subscription’, I do not really see the appeal of an xbox, especially if you also own a pc. PS has exclusives, xbox does not - at least not ones I’d be interested in and couldn’t play on PC.
More and more I am just like “SELF-HOST ALL THE THINGS”. I’ve been setting up Wake-On-Lan and using Steam Remote Play to satisfy my game streaming needs and it’s better than GeForce Now in many respects. Plus there’s no game limitations.
I get that it isn’t a perfect replacement for those who don’t want to drop the insane amounts of cash on a GPU these days though.
I don’t know about that. A lot of us didn’t even know these CD-I games existed. Hell, I was a 90’s kid that subscribed to game magazines, and my only real exposure to it was some random educational games that my school bought and then never really used.
If you go around and ask 40 somethings if they played CD-I games, you’re going to get a lot of people who say “what was that?”
engadget.com
Ważne