Meanwhile Larian studio reminding everyone that a good way to make money and avoid layoffs is to be nimble and make good games.
Big Corps sees nimble and good studio making a good game, starts layoffs immediately.
The real murderers are the people that sell their studio to a big publisher. They immediately seal the fate of their teams. They will have layoffs eventually…
I love Larian and am ride or die with Swen et al. Have been ever since Divine Divinity was “we have Diablo at home” but ended up being a shockingly good (for its time) hybrid ARPG/CRPG.
But Larian are very much not the example of “how to do business”. Like Digital Extremes, they are a “legacy” studio that is INCREDIBLY lucky to have survived. Larian themselves had to deal with really shitty publisher deals (Beyond Divinity and I think also Divinity 2?) and games so bad it almost killed the studio (even Mortismal himself will acknowledge that Divinity 2 was a trash fire before the DLC… and was still a mess after). It was mostly “lucking out” and embracing Kickstarter before everyone hated it that saved them. And… Dragon Commander still got close.
And you know what has REALLY made them stable? That’s right. A deal with a major company to work on one of the most famous IPs in gaming (tabletop and video) history.
Larian are smart to try to maintain their size and not overly grow. But, like countless game devs have said and gotten shouted down for, they are far from “typical” and got REALLY lucky. Hell, Swen himself has mentioned the same in between the blurbs that outlets love to reference.
You forgot to mention they sold 30% stake of the company to the world‘s largest game conglomerate Tencent. They‘re also working on a supposedly much larger game than BG3 now and plan to release it within the next 4 years which means they will have to at least double their staff. Honestly, judging a developer entirely by a recent success isn‘t a good practice even when it‘s as massive as BG3. Most people who talk about Larian have a very warped impression. Even when their games are great recently, the tides can change rapidly in this industry.
Yeah did someone just run or interpret reports incorrectly? If a person subscribes to Game Pass and plays Hi Fi Rush for X months, I’d consider that a sale.
If they play it exclusively, sure. But people play tons of games on Gamepass. HiFi Rush and a dozen other games splitting that $15/month/account is a lot less rosy.
I’ve had Gamepass since the beginning, and since it was launched it I’ve bought maybe 1 or 2 Xbox games that weren’t on gamepass, whereas I used to average 2-3 a month. My overall spending on games has dropped massively since getting gamepass - especially on Xbox.
Just the fact that they played some minimum amount should tell them the game contributed to the subscriber’s enjoyment of Game Pass. Otherwise if they are both selling a game and giving it to Game Pass subscribers for free I’m not sure what they are expecting. Can’t have your cake and eat it too, but I’m sure they would like that.
Maybe they are hoping that Game Pass is like extended demos and will lead to more game sales. But there are too many new games all the time for most to hold my interest.
I think they expected more casual gamers to sign up for game pass while the more dedicated among us would still be buying new products.
Honestly, they’d probably be doing better if they didn’t put games on there day 1. Sony doesn’t put their biggest titles on PS+ at launch for a reason.
Halo and starfield had shit sales because we didn’t have to buy them. If they required people to buy the triple-A in-house titles at launch, the double-A stuff like HiFi Rush could still be released on gamepass day 1 as an incentive for people to subscribe.
As it stands, Starfield and Forza burned the money that should be used for HiFi Rush and Ori.
Absolutely agree, just recently instead of buying Manor Lords I just found a good deal on a month of Game Pass. I played it as much as I wanted (for now) for less than $10.
Hmmm it’s almost like Jim Ryan was on to something when he said gamepass wasn’t good for the industry and publishers didn’t like it during the antitrust trial with Microsoft.
It blows my fucking mind how stupid some people are just to be able to play the next rehashed bullshit CoD on gamepass instead of paying $70 a year for the same garbage.
Part of the problem might be that I literally have no idea what their current console is called? Whoever was in charge of naming the last threeish xbox consoles should be fired out of a cannon
Yeah, totally agree on this. If you put the last two names in front of me and asked which was newer, I’d have no idea. The new one has multiple versions too so it makes it more confusing.
They had all that free marketting from people assuming the third one would be the 720 and they ditched it in favor of calling it the Xbox One, which everyone was already using for the name of the first Xbox. Still baffled by that one.
I can’t think of a single company worse at naming products and services than Microsoft. They have an abysmal track record. Some examples off the top of my head, all of which make web searches near-impossible:
They renamed Office 365 to just “365” (and then “365 Copilot”). The mind boggles.
They named their lightweight extensible code editor “Visual Studio Code”, despite the fact that they had a long-established IDE (for code) called “Visual Studio”.
They called their application framework “the .NET framework”, despite .net already being a popular TLD.
They called the replacement framework “.NET Core”, and after a few major versions, changed to calling it “.NET”, but it’s totally distinct from the .NET framework.
They called their ninth major desktop operating system “Windows 7”, then followed up with “Windows 8” and… “Windows 10”.
Their native web app replacement for Outlook is called “New Outlook”.
They recently renamed their Remote Desktop app “Windows App”. I have no words.
One would almost think they are having a laugh, but no it’s for real (I don’t think are intentionally trying to come up with such comically stupid naming policies).
Yeah, sometimes I wonder if they do these bad names for the free publicity of people complaining about them. But then there’s plenty examples where the name isn’t just clunky, but rather actively confusing for potential users…
Teams (New) is the next version of teams except I literally don’t know what they’ve done because I can’t see any difference.
New Teams appears to be a totally different project except again it looks identical but the calendar is different, they’ve actually managed to make the calendar worse, which is impressive since it was pretty goddamn unusable to start with.
I don’t understand why they have two development strands going on simultaneously.
Microsoft suck at naming things in general. It’s a problem across every single branch of the business, people keep calling Office 365 0365 because Microsoft insists on calling it O365 and people think that’s a zero. Also the name makes no sense anyway, why not call it Microsoft Office Online?
Then we have Microsoft Azure, except they renamed that to Entra despite the fact that both names are stupid. Then of course there is the entirety of the Windows OS lineup.
Entra isn’t Azure. Entra ID is what they renamed Azure Active Directory to. But not always; there’s also Azure Active Directory B2C (yes, that’s the fully expanded name). And various other Azure-branded things that may or may not belong together.
Microsoft are spectacularly bad at naming things.
It’s a miracle they haven’t renamed Windows 11 to “360 365” or “Live 6.5” or “Active-DOS Series X” or something.
Don’t know what you mean. Xbox, Xbox 360, Xbox One, Xbox One S, Xbox One X, Xbox Series S and Xbox Series X all make perfect sense and leave zero grounds for confusion at all
Not quite as important as the right to repair, but close in spirit: I would love to see a legal requirement for shut-down online games to release the server specs needed for the community to replace/maintain them.
Edit: And data export for existing players, so our game progress can be reconstructed on community servers, of course.
shutting down most central servers is a death sentence anyway. I'm not putting another decade of grinding into a private server when my Diablo 3 characters are gone.
Yeah… For battle royal and extraction shooters I think it would also be pretty hard to come close to the experience on private servers.
Granted, I wouldn’t mind being able to play e.g. Hunt Showdown with some friends on a private server/in a private match. It wouldn’t be what it is today, but it could still be fun.
It’s not like games with large populations are really getting shut down anyways. The games that are killed are already dead for most people. I really only am bothered by it when it’s a clearly single player/offline friendly game.
Agreed. But not impossible. Insignia got original Halo 2 Xbox Live servers back online. Most nights you can find a game easily with 20-40 people online during peak hours. It requires a soft mod and maybe 1-2 hours of set up to get online. If anyone could just turn on their old Xbox and play, I’m confident those numbers would be in the hundreds at least.
Allowing people to run private servers is an easy way to allow those that want to play to keep playing in an era where most games have some level of online functionality.
Well, when companies are cutting off people’s purchases and wiping works from our cultural history, a little bit of disregard for the law that is complicit with it is pretty much necessary.
Say, it’s through copyright violation that we can still play games from Mario Maker 1 even though the servers were shut down. People figured out how to copy it even though they weren’t allowed to.
If this is wrong, maybe the law should be fixed to provide a proper path.
This is not enough, the code is old with vulnerabilities that will be exploited with automation nowadays. To correctly do this you need open source server code, or to have it maintained.
What do you mean by specs then? The protocol? The “protocol” is the ABI of the server binary, the logic of it. The networking protocol is super simple. You need the server code for replicating any server.
I mean whatever is needed for the community to replace/maintain the servers, just as I said.
That would obviously include the network protocols, but might also include data structures, API contracts, map data, timetables, and any number of other things.
I wrote in general terms deliberately, since it would mean different things for different games, and to allow for the possibility of releasing source code instead of descriptive specs.
(And no, source code is not the only way to do it. If that were the case, the community-developed game servers that have been made through reverse engineering could never have existed.)
The different school in 8 months after Skull and Bones launch:
Our curriculum isn’t doing well. This is not the curriculum we wanted to deliver. Players expect better, yada yada yada, you know the usual school’s apology stuff. We need to lay off 100% of teachers so as to realign, synergize, refocus, retool, and remoney our money-making money curriculum disguised as a “game”. We will do better. We hear you loud and clear (kind of), and we probably learned a lesson of some kind.
We’ve had tools to manage workflows for decades. You don’t need Copilot injected into every corner of your interface to achieve this. I suspect the bigger challenge for Larian is working in a development suite that can’t be accused of having “AI Assist” hiding somewhere in the internals.
Yup! Certifying a workflow as AI-free would be a monumental task now. First, you’d have to designate exactly what kinds of AI you mean, which is a harder task than I think people realize. Then, you’d have to identify every instance of that kind of AI in every tool you might use. And just looking at Adobe, there’s a lot. Then you, what, forbid your team from using them, sure, but how do you monitor that? Ya can’t uninstall generative fill from Photoshop. Anyway, that’s why anything with a complicated design process marked “AI-Free” is going to be the equivalent of greenwashing, at least for a while. But they should be able to prevent obvious slop from being in the final product just in regular testing.
Coincidentally, this paper published yesterday indicates that LLMs are worse at coding the closer you get to the low level like assembly or binary. Or more precisely, ya stop seeing improvements pretty early on in scaling up the models. If I’m reading it right, which I’m probably not.
Yeah, do you use any Microsoft products at all (like 98% of corporate software development does)? Everything from teams to word to visual studio has copilot sitting there. It would just take one employee asking it a question to render a no-AI pledge a lie.
You know it doesn’t have to be all or nothing, right?
In the early design phase, for example, quick placeholder objects are invaluable for composing a scene. Say you want a dozen different effigies built from wood and straw – you let the clanker churn them out. If you like them, an environment artist can replace them with bespoke models, as detailed and as optimized as the scene needs it. If you don’t like them, you can just chuck them in the trash and you won’t have wasted the work of an artist, who can work on artwork that will actually appear in the released product.
Larian haven’t done anything to make me question their credibility in this matter.
You know it doesn’t have to be all or nothing, right?
Part of the “magic” of AI is how much of the design process gets hijacked by inference. At some scale you simply don’t have control of your own product anymore. What is normally a process of building up an asset by layers becomes flattened blobs you need to meticulously deconstruct and reconstruct if you want them to not look like total shit.
That’s a big part of the reason why “AI slop” looks so bad. Inference is fundamentally not how people create complex and delicate art pieces. It’s like constructing a house by starting with the paint job and ending with the framing lumber, then asking an architect to fix where you fucked up.
If you don’t like them, you can just chuck them in the trash and you won’t have wasted the work of an artist
If you engineer your art department to start with verbal prompts rather than sketches and rough drawings, you’re handcuffing yourself to the heuristics of your AI dataset. It doesn’t matter that you can throw away what you don’t like. It matters that you’re preemptively limiting yourself to what you’ll eventually approve.
That’s a big part of the reason why “AI slop” looks so bad. Inference is fundamentally not how people create complex and delicate art pieces. It’s like constructing a house by starting with the paint job and ending with the framing lumber, then asking an architect to fix where you fucked up.
This is just the whole robot sandwich thing to me.
A tool is a tool. Fools may not use them well, but someone who understands how to properly use a tool can get great things out of it.
Doesn’t anybody remember how internet search was in the early days? How you had to craft very specific searches to get something you actually wanted? To me this is like that. I use generative AI as a search engine and just like with altavista or google, it’s up to my own evaluation of the results and my own acumen with the prompt to get me where I want to be. Even then, I still need to pay attention and make sure what I have is relevant and useful.
I think artists could use gen AI to make more good art than ever, but just like a photographer… a thousand shots only results in a very small number of truly amazing outcomes.
Gen AI can’t think for itself or for anybody, and if you let it do the thinking and end up with slop well… garbage in, garbage out.
At the end of the day right now two people can use the same tools and ask for the same things and get wildly different outputs. It doesn’t have to be garbage unless you let it be though.
I will say, gen AI seems to be the only way to combat the insane BEC attacks we have today. I can’t babysit every single user’s every email, but it sure as hell can bring me a shortlist of things to look at. Something might get through, but before I had a tool a ton of shit got through, and we almost paid tens of thousands of dollars in a single bogus but convincing looking invoice. It went so far as a fucking bank account penny test (they verified two ach deposits) Four different people gave their approvals - head of accounting included… before a junior person asked us if we saw anything fishy. This is just one example for why gen AI can have real practical use cases.
This is just the whole robot sandwich thing to me.
If home kitchens were being replaced by pre-filled Automats, I’d be equally repulsed.
A tool is a tool. Fools may not use them well, but someone who understands how to properly use a tool can get great things out of it.
The most expert craftsman won’t get a round peg to fit into a square hole without doing some damage. At some point, you need to understand what the tool is useful for. And the danger of LLMs boils down to the seeming industrial scale willingness to sacrifice quality for expediency and defend the choice in the name of business profit.
Doesn’t anybody remember how internet search was in the early days? How you had to craft very specific searches to get something you actually wanted?
Internet search was as much constrained by what was online as what you entered in the prompt. You might ask for a horse and get a hundred different Palominos when you wanted a Clydesdale, not realizing the need to be specific. But you’re never going to find a picture of a Vermont Morgan horse if nobody bothered to snap a photo and host it where a crawler could find it.
Taken to the next level with LLMs, you’re never going to infer a Vermont Morgan if it isn’t in the training data. You’re never going to even think to look for one, if the LLM hasn’t bothered to index it properly. And because these AI engines are constantly eating their own tails, what you get is a basket of horses that are inferred between a Palomino and a Clydesdale, sucked back into training data, and inferred in between a Palomino and a Palomino-Clydesdale, and sucked back into the training data, and, and, and…
I think artists could use gen AI to make more good art than ever
I don’t think using an increasingly elaborate and sophisticated crutch will teach you to sprint faster than Hussein Bolt. Removing steps in the artistic process and relying on glorified Clipart Catalogs will not improve your output. It will speed up your output and meet some minimum viable standard for release. But the goal of that process is to remove human involvement, not improve human involvement.
I will say, gen AI seems to be the only way to combat the insane BEC attacks we have today.
Which is great. Love to use algorithmic defenses to combat algorithmic attacks.
But that’s a completely different problem than using inference to generate art assets.
I get the knee jerk reaction because everything has been so horrible everywhere lately with AI, but they’re actually one of the few companies using it right.
There are AI’s that are ethically trained. There are AI’s that run on local hardware. We’ll eventually need AI ratings to distinguish use types, I suppose.
It’s even more complicated than that: “AI” is not even a well-defined term. Back when Quake 3 was still in beta (“the demo”), id Software held a competition to develop “bot AIs” that could be added to a server so players would have something to play against while they waited for more people to join (or you could have players VS bots style matches).
That was over 25 years ago. What kind of “AI” do you think was used back then? 🤣
The AI hater extremists seem to be in two camps:
Data center haters
AI-is-killing-jobs
The data center haters are the strangest, to me. Because there’s this default assumption that data centers can never be powered by renewable energy and that AI will never improve to the point where it can all be run locally on people’s PCs (and other, personal hardware).
Yet every day there’s news suggesting that local AI is performing better and better. It seems inevitable—to me—that “big AI” will go the same route as mainframes.
colloquially today most people mean genAI like LLMs when they say “AI” for brevity.
Because there’s this default assumption that data centers can never be powered by renewable energy
that’s not the point at all. the point is, even before AI, our increasing energy needs were outpacing our ability/willingness to switch to green energy. Even then we were using more fossil fuels than at any point in the history of the world. Now AI is just adding a whole other layer of energy demand on top of that.
sure, maybe, eventually, we will power everything with green energy, but… we aren’t actually doing that, and we don’t have time to catch up. every bit longer it takes us to eliminate fossil fuels will add to negative effects on our climate and ecosystems.
The power use from AI is orthogonal to renewable energy. From the news, you’d think that AI data centers have become the number one cause of global warming. Yet, they’re not even in the top 100. Even at the current pace of data center buildouts, they won’t make the top 100… ever.
AI data center power utilization is a regional problem specific to certain localities. It’s a bad idea to build such a data center in certain places but companies do it anyway (for economic reasons that are easy to fix with regulation). It’s not a universal problem across the globe.
Aside: I’d like to point out that the fusion reactor designs currently being built and tested were created using AI. Much of the advancements in that area are thanks to “AI data centers”. If fusion power becomes a reality in the next 50 years it’ll have more than made up for any emissions from data centers. From all of them, ever.
Power source is only one impact. Water for cooling is even bigger. There are data centers pumping out huge amounts of heat in places like AZ, TX, CA where water is scarce and temps are high.
Is the water “consumed” when used for this purpose? I don’t know how data centers do it but it wouldn’t seem that it would need to be constantly drawing water from a local system. They could even source it from elsewhere if necessary.
Closed loop systems are expensive. A lot of them are literally spraying water directly on to heat exchangers. And they often pull directly from city drinking water. As some Texas towns have been asked to reduce water consumption so the data center doesn’t run out
Data centers typically use closed loop cooling systems but those do still lose a bit of water each day that needs to be replaced. It’s not much—compared to the size of the data center—but it’s still a non-trivial amount.
A study recently came out (it was talked about extensively on the Science VS podcast) that said that a long conversation with an AI chat bot (e.g. ChatGPT) could use up to half a liter of water—in the worst case scenario.
This statistic has been used in the news quite a lot recently but it’s a bad statistic: That water usage counts the water used by the power plant (for its own cooling). That’s typically water that would come from ponds and similar that would’ve been built right alongside the power plant (your classic “cooling pond”). So it’s not like the data centers are using 0.5L of fresh water that could be going to people’s homes.
For reference, the actual data center water usage is 12% of that 0.5L: 0.06L of water (for a long chat). Also remember: This is the worst-case scenario with a very poorly-engineered data center.
Another stat from the study that’s relevant: Generating images uses much less energy/water than chat. However, generating videos uses up an order of magnitude more than both (combined).
So if you want the lowest possible energy usage of modern, generative AI: Use fast (low parameter count), open source models… To generate images 👍
Some use up the water through evaporation, so they constantly draw water. Some “consume” the water, meaning they have a closed system of cooling water, but that uses a lot more electricity than evaporative cooling, which also uses water to generate.
Sure. My company has a database of all technical papers written by employees in the last 30-ish years. Nearly all of these contain proprietary information from other companies (we deal with tons of other companies and have access to their data), so we can’t build a public LLM nor use a public LLM. So we created an internal-only LLM that is only trained on our data.
You are solely using your own data or rather you are refining an existing LLM or rather RAG?
I’m not an expert but AFAIK training an LLM requires, by definition, a vast mount of text so I’m skeptical that ANY company publish enough papers to do so. I understand if you can’t share more about the process. Maybe me saying “AI” was too broad.
I’d bet my lunch this internal LLM is a trained open weight model, which has lots of public data in it. Not complaining about what your company has done, as I think that makes sense, just providing a counterpoint.
Right, and to be clear I’m not saying it’s not possible (if fact I some models in mind but I’d rather let others share first). This isn’t a trick question, it’s a genuine request to hopefully be able to rely on such tools.
The Firefly image generator is a diffusion model, and the Firefly video generator is a diffusion transformer. LLMs aren’t involved in either process - rather the models learn image-text relationships from meta tags. I believe there are some ChatGPT integrations with Reader and Acrobat, but that’s unrelated to Firefly.
As I understand it, CLIP (and other text encoders in diffusion models) aren’t trained like LLMs, exactly. They’re trained on image/text pairing, which ya get from the metadata creators upload with their photos in Adobe Stock. Open AI trained CLIP with alt text on scraped images, but I assume Adobe would want to train their own text encoder on the more extensive tags on the stock images its already using.
All that said, Adobe hasn’t published their entire architecture. And there were some reports during the training of Firefly 1 back in ’22 that they weren’t filtering out AI-generated images in the training set. At the time, those made up ~5% of the full stock library. Currently, AI images make up about half of Adobe Stock, though filtering them out seems to work well. We don’t know if they were included in later versions of Firefly. There’s an incentive for Adobe to filter them out, since AI trained on AI tends to lose its tails (the ability to handle edge cases well), and that would be pretty devastating for something like generative fill.
I figure we want to encourage companies to do better, whatever that looks like. For a monopolistic giant like Adobe, they seem to have at least done better. And at some point, they have to rely on the artists uploading stock photos to be honest. Not just about AI, but about release forms, photo shoot working conditions, local laws being followed while shooting, etc. They do have some incentive to be honest, since Adobe pays them, but I don’t doubt there are issues there too.
Apertus was developed with due consideration to Swiss data protection laws, Swiss copyright laws, and the transparency obligations under the EU AI Act. Particular attention has been paid to data integrity and ethical standards: the training corpus builds only on data which is publicly available. It is filtered to respect machine-readable opt-out requests from websites, even retroactively, and to remove personal data, and other undesired content before training begins.
Thanks, a friend recommended it few days ago indeed but unfortunately AFAICT they don’t provide the CO2eq in their model card nor an analogy equivalence non technical users could understand.
The cat’s out of the bag. Focus your energy on stopping fascist oligarchs then regulating AI to be as green and democratic as possible. Or sit back and avoid it out of ethical concerns as the fascists use it to target and eliminate you.
The number of people who think that saying that the cat’s out of the bag is somehow redeeming is completely bizarre. Would you say this about slavery too in the 1800s? Just because people are doing it doesn’t mean it’s morally or ethically right to do it, nor that we should put up with it.
The “cat” does not refer to unethical training of models. Tell me, if we somehow managed to delete every single unethically trained model in existence AND miraculously prevent another one from being ever made (ignoring the part where the AI bubble pops) what would happen? Do you think everyone would go “welp, no more AI I guess.” NO! People would immediately get to work making an “ethically trained” model (according to some regulatory definition of “ethical”), and by “people” I don’t mean just anyone, I mean the people who can afford to gather or license the most exclusive training data: the wealthy.
“Cat’s out of the bag” means the knowledge of what’s possible is out there and everyone knows it. The only thing you could gain by trying to put it “back in the bag” is to help the ultra wealthy capitalize on it.
So, much like with slavery and animal testing and nuclear weapons, what we should do instead is recognize that we live in a reality where the cat is out of the bag, and try to prevent harm caused by it going forward.
No one [intelligent] is using an LLm for workflow organization. Despite what the media will try to convince you, Not every AI is an LLM or even and LLM trained on all the copyrighted shit you can find in the Internet.
Most of the upper eschalon of 343 have left or were kicked out over the last year, including some of the worst offenders who drove the creation of the crap we've had recently such as Kiki Wolf kill.
It seems like they're internally rebuilding 343 because they know how much of a powerhouse that IP can be if done right. I'm not optimistic about the next Halo, but cautiously hopeful now at least.
I doubt it is even thoughts over how powerful Halo is as an IP. I would be shocked if MS corporate hadn’t realized that any 343 Halo is going to get shit on because “this isn’t Bungie”. And people hate 343 enough that firing them and pushing the leads out won’t raise any red flags.
But yeah. Look at how much damage control MS did when they were releasing fucking Pentiment on switch (look, I love that game with all my heart but you know things are fucked when people remember it exists). There is zero chance 343 “closes” until the next full generation… probably that gen’s refresh SKU consoles. Because it would instantly be interpreted as “xbox is dead”.
But gutting Bethesda? We already see people in this very thread talking about how it is good because they didn’t like a game one of the studios did.
It's possible people won't accept a new game just because of the name attached, but that's not what I'm seeing.
I still play Infinite pretty heavily and most of the people I chat with there are saying the same, thank the lord leadership changed, let's give it a year or two and see.
If halo infinite had been a well balanced Battle Royale game… I’d probably have thrown away everything I love due to overplaying a damn game.
I’m just so sick of multiplayer shooters. The repetition didn’t seem so bad when I was young, but now it just numbs my brain.
But BR is the perfect combo of “my squad vs the world” that you get in a PVE coop, but also the rush of beating real life opponents that makes you keep coming back.
Warzone is all my friends play now, but it’s gotten so stale that no one really pushes to squad up too frequently.
Halo infinite multiplayer is free. The forge community has created a battle royale mode I've heard. Maybe give it a shot? I don't know anything other than it exists.
I personally can't stand battle royale games, so sorry, but I hope the next isn't. It's just not what Halo is. If they released a mode, or a side game as a Battle Royale I'm all for it, but not a full main game.
I feel the burnout though. My normal gaming friends and I are in a mode of trying new games right now and don't play together as much.
I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. Am I the only one that felt Hi-fi Rush was a disappointment? I played plenty of rhythm games and Hi-fi Rush just felt off throughout, landing beats didn’t feel satisfying and it felt off sync at timee. The story was well I can see people liking it but it felt too Disney-ish and cringe for me. I couldn’t get past playing it after the 2nd level.
It’s an interesting concept but I can’t call it a good game.
A media franchise, also known as a multimedia franchise, is a collection of related media in which several derivative works have been produced from an original creative work of fiction, such as a film, a work of literature, a television program, or a video game. Bob Iger, chief executive of the Walt Disney Company, defined the word franchise as "something that creates value across multiple businesses and across multiple territories over a long period of time."[1]
My understanding is that’s deliberate. The Wacowskis were done with The Matrix, the original trilogy (+ Animatrix) was the complete package. But the powers that be demanded more to milk the franchise, and when the Wacowskis tried to push back, the higher-ups said they would do it with or without them. So the Wacowskis are deliberately sabotaging the sequels, and good on em.
The fourth movie was written by one of the Wachowskis as a metaphor for their own transition, as a creative outlet during a grieving period after the death of their parents.
As I recall them saying, they felt that way maybe in retrospect? They hadn’t transitioned in real life by then, so that’s getting pretty subconscious at that point. At the time, the metaphors that were clear were about dreams, the savior allegory, a sense of not mattering as a cog in the machine, and so forth.
I did. Its cynicism about making another Matrix movie is well-noted and some of the most fascinating things about that movie, but it’s also a protagonist swap between Neo and Trinity, which makes a ton of sense for the trans metaphor. It can be cynical about the realities of making the movie and still not be sabotage. And also it was only written by one of the two Wachowskis.
Cancellation like this aren’t always bad. Especially given BG3 as a whole, sometimes it’s good to just ship a complete product, and move onto newer things. They earned a break
Yeah I don’t think so – Sequels are the thing you’re supposed to have I think. Everyone drooling over having subscriptions since MMOs sucks and it really looks like the whole culture of the industry is pretty shitty in a lot of ways
E: I guess expansions can be good so you don’t have to be an EA sports franchise if you’re not changing the engine a bunch. Other than EUIV though, whose expansions are a money grab way to make the game cost 150 bucks, I haven’t ever played DLC I can think of.
Unless the sequel is using way better tech and requires a new engine or massive engine tweaks, a sequel that comes shortly after the original release could be done better, faster and cheaper as an expansion pack.
Other than EUIV though, whose expansions are a money grab way to make the game cost 150 bucks, I haven’t ever played DLC I can think of.
Well there ya go. Paradox DLC is just bullshit. Most of them just add like 1-2 units or characters or factions which mostly boil down to an aesthetic change. Most big games get real additions via DLC that can add up to 50% more game.
The non cosmetic Paradox DLCs fundamentally change the games so if you want to actually play the latest version of the game with all the mechanics you have to get them all. You can get them on steam sale usually for like 50 bucks a couple times a year.
I’m not defending it – It is what colors me most against DLCs.
I still just don’t like the idea of it – Why not do a DLC for movies and paintings and books? It feels wrong to fork a work of art or say “Oh sorry I didn’t actually make it all here’s the other 20%”
Come to think of it – Movie sequels are kind of like that these days where it’s just one story broken up instead of multiple separate stories. I wish we just did 4 hour movies with intermission but I’m sure I’m alone there.
Just a few dlc/expansion packs that were totally worth their money
All Rimworld expansions. Diablo 3 reaper of souls/ D2 lord of destruction The witcher Ballad of gay tony Star craft ones Red alert yuris revenge Horizon zero dawn frozen wilds
Etc… There are good expansions that are totally worth their money and add to the overall game.
That being said, I’m not a huge dlc fan and rarely spend money on them if they don’t really add to the game. More partial to spend on dlc for smaller studio games rather than large ones.
I didn’t even buy the Rimworld DLCs and I have 500+ hours! I did look at them but didn’t buy. Now that DF is graphical I mostly just play that now tbh.
DF is a great example – 15+ years updates no DLCs unless you count the steam release.
In what world is paying 40usd for a game and 3x 30usd for 500h of entertainment not a good deal? (not particularly aimed at you, but at dlc haters in general)
I am glad when they release a dlc. I get more great content. They get some more financial support.
I am 100% against cheap cash grabs. I am 100% pro multiple well made extentions for a game that allow me to support the studio.
They didn’t add all that many units, two per race. But they did have a great impact on the game (mostly).
Also, new campaigns for each race was awesome. The level editor not only brought many fun custom maps (I still think about that weird 300 map I played when I was 16), but ensured longevity of the game until this day by enabling new maps to be played in regular games.
I miss getting all this stuff with a game or expansion too.
web.archive.org/web/20230924045050/…/PureDarkHe started hiding his count but he was at 11k last week and his most popular/cheapest tier is $5 USD so he makes 55k a month. So basically 660k+ a year.
They do more Linux and Mac porting than any other company I know. Back in the day I believe they were actually game developer, but they seem to have become specialized in porting games specifically.
What makes you think that? It’s possible that they did it in-house, of course, but there’s no precedent for it. No previous Civ had a linux version done in-house.
Patch 5 also improves inventory access, letting players manage the inventory of all companions from one single UI, regardless of whether or not they’re currently in your party.
YES. I was just looking for a mod to do this but it’s so much better when the devs build out a highly-requested feature like this.
While at camp, you can now access and manage the inventories of companions who aren’t in your active party.
Sounds like it’s not possible everywhere just at camp, also, the main thing I want is official autosorting containers, I use the mod but it can be janky at times, inventory management has put me off playing and I really want to I just got sick of organising loot and marking as items to sell and splitting stacks etc etc
You know I was trying to figure out why I lost interest in Chapter 3 and started playing Total War, and I think this is it (also a dialogue bug that made companions start spoiling the plot…)
I’ve never been a huge fan of inventory management and after a while it gets very tedious in BG3.
Jokes on me though, I’m playing Thorek in Warhammer 2 rn and he’s a crafting lord so I turned a semi-RTS into an inventory management game anyways.
The inventory management in the game is shockingly bad.
“Oh, I got a new companion. I wonder what I can equip them with.”
Good luck, because the gear is scattered among your inactive companions, or the chests that might be locked to you in co-op.
“I need to take a potion mid combat”
It’s somewhere in those 20 inventory wheels!
The whole inventory weight is kind of pointless as well, since you can send to camp at any point, and there’s very few places where you can’t just go back and get something. It’s just inconvenience kept for the sake of following some arbitrary rules.
Gear especially should just be kept in a separate place from consumables and quest items, with maybe some quick swap wardrobe feature for e.g. switching to a bludgeoning weapon for smashing walls.
Good luck, because the gear is scattered among your inactive companions, or the chests that might be locked to you in co-op.
This has explicitly been changed this patch.
It’s just inconvenience kept for the sake of following some arbitrary rules.
It’s on one hand a BG throwback and more.importantly a minor impediment to the time-tested tactic in Larian games of “barrelmancy.” Look up some Telekinesis runs on Divinity:Original Sin to see why.
First game was just Diablo 2 but FPS with guns. But I can totally respect anyone that didn’t jive with that. The humor was very hit and miss and definitely made but a group of people who insisted they were hilarious.
Pre-Sequel, 3 and Wonderlands have all been great games that I had lots of fun with. I also know I’m going to have upwards of 100 hours of fun with 4. That’s what makes this whole story even more frustrating…
But I’m a patient gamer. I played the previous BL games years after they came out. I’ll do the same for this one - not because I can’t afford a 60€ price tag but because articles like this. Sad.
BL4 is awesome so far. Works fantastic on PS5. I hope next time they just skip releasing a PC version at all and use the extra resources for the other versions like GTA.
Can’t wait for major story spoilers to show up full-screen on the background of the homescreen because clickbaiters on YouTube are fucking assholes.
Also really don’t need product placement on the home, I am on my PS5 to play games, not to fucking buy stuff. It’s a console, not a goddamn webshop.
This really needs an option to get disabled.
Edit: Reading again it just seems to get worse. Looking at the alternative game ads, offers and promotions when selecting a game seems borderline against consumer laws, at least in EU. Especially kids could be easily targeted and triggered by this. Also most of these examples make it look like you’re starting up an entirely different game, it’s just such a awful update all together. No self-respecting interface designer would come up with this, it’s 100% corporate predatory marketing cunts that came up with this kind of stuff.
I heard from another lemmy user that his new Xbox required him to click an ad to finish booting up. So with a grain of salt MS’ consoles are even worse. If this continues and i don’t see why it won’t, PC gaming gonna be the only viable one soon. Thank God steamdeck and valve Linux collab are now a thing
God, that’s awful. Is it connected to the Internet or are they internal ads? I suppose you’ve already looked into a piratefix firmware update or something? I have a big roku tv that i keep away from my wifi lest ads sneak into my experience too
I’d kill Internet to it if my wife didn’t leave on random free streaming shit like Pluto to play for the dogs when we leave. The steps it takes for me to get to streamio are nuts. Boot on TV -> close ad and navigation to Fire stick -> listen to auto play ad while piece of shit fire stick loads UI -> finally get to watch what I want.
Ugh I love Steam but when I click on a new game, sometimes it’s like WATCH THIS STREAMER STREAM and it’s in the middle of the game like I WANT GO INTO IT BLIND GIVE ME AN OPTION TO DISABLE THIS
Sure thing, if I were in front of my pc I’d have given you more precise instructions but yeah I was elated when I found that setting as I don’t enjoy livestreams even if it’s not a spoiler.
Console makers see them as one and the same. This being Lemmy I have to advise that the only solution is to own your own machine, so best build your own hardware, install Linux, and compile all the games you want to play yourself.
I have a PC, with Windows though, I can’t be bothered with the limited Linux support and hardware woes that come with it.
I only played a few exclusives on the PS5 before, most recently Astro Bot, but since everything else is basically coming to PC I recently upgraded it anyway. It’s becoming less and less appealing to even bother with consoles anymore. Even Nintendo seems to barely bother to dare anything innovating.
My Linux gaming machine is a Steam Deck, it’s been a pretty positive experience and you only really need to tinker if you’re straying off the golden path.
I imagine we’ll see some new Nintendo innovation with the Switch 2, they are at least good for throwing in a load of wacky ideas with new consoles.
To be fair the Steam Deck is similar to consoles, it is only one piece of hardware that people can’t alter (or aren’t meant to) that natively runs on a Linux system and is entirely designed to work as such. I think the Steam Deck is an interesting concept, but I don’t believe it can be compared to custom built computers, as well as the idea of supported games on any choice of Linux distribution. Support is significantly better than it used to be, but it’s still such a long way off.
While it defaults to a console-like experience it is meant to be altered, they give you a full desktop environment as standard and even provide instructions to install Windows if you really want.
Was going to say… Who is out there buying games way outside their machines’ specs? Seems pretty straightforward.
I do get a little annoyed at the folks angry at BL4 using a higher end engine. Like, it does look a lot better than previous iterations. That engine upgrade wasn’t for nothing.
There are a ton of looter shooters floating around that aren’t using the Unreal 5 engine. Just play one of those instead.
Sorry but when in the world is that even remotely acceptable that you consider last Gen was outside machine specs when the developers said sure two generations ago is perfectly fine, which btw, holy crap it’s not.
There’s a difference between a game being way outside of your specs because it’s graphically very advanced and your hardware is old, and a game just being unoptimized slop that expects its users to deal with by throwing higher specs at a fixable problem.
I have a brand new 5070ti that can play all kinds of UE5 games with much better graphics than BL4 at 4k resolution with ray tracing at a decent frame rate without relying on frame gen. And I’m in the top few percentiles here.
I have a 3090 in a 7800x3d box with 64 gb ram and I had to drop from 7680x2160 to 3840x1080 to get decent framerates. I get better performance in Star Citizen. After a few CTD’s I just went ahead and got a refund.
UE5 can run fine on older hardware, but most devs either aren’t given the time to properly optimize or don’t give a fuck about it and would rather rely on upscaling and frame gen tech.
It’s hard to consider an 81 on OpenCritic to be a trainwreck. People tend to buy games that review well, especially when it’s a co-op shooter with basically no competition.
You aren’t out of touch. Even the worst games don’t get that poor of a review. When you job depends on being on their side, it turns out you can’t voice an honest opinion.
I honestly don’t know what this “trainwreck” talk is. BL3 was passable. I didn’t like the antagonists, but the game played fine if purples dropped way too much and the new guns weren’t great. People make it seem like it was the Worst Game Ever and I don’t get it. The pre-sequel was hot garbage, but 3 was fine.
there’s no nuance in anything anymore. you can’t just say “oh this isn’t really for me, honestly.”
you have to write 18 paragraphs about the fall of the video game industry because of this one game and how its hot trash, kills newborns while they sleep, etc.
Like the driver for controlling one vendor’s LED lights had a generic PCI FW updater (or something similar) included that it exposed to user space. This meant a) changing the LED colours or parameters required a firmware update rather than the firmware handling input from the system to adjust colours without new code, and b) other software could use this and just change the bus id of the target to update other firmware willy nilly.
It also had to compete for bus time and sending a full firmware update takes more time than a few colour update parameters. Average case might be ok, but it would make worst case scenarios worse, like OS wants to page in from disk 1 while a game needs to read shader code from disk 2 that it needs to immediately send to the GPU but the led controller decides it’s time to switch to the next theme in the list oh and there’s some packets that just came in over the network and the audio buffer is getting low. GPU ends up missing a frame deadline for the display engine and your screen goes black for a second while it re-establishes the connection between GPU and monitor.
They only need to make sure it’s difficult enough the average user can’t be bothered to figure out the workaround. I’m sure without looking they made a considerate sum from the neglected children market.
You know the cosmetics things that you could unlock using cheat codes 20 years ago in single player games ? You now have to pay for it. And they bloat your OS kernel to ensure that you don’t get those valuables skins without actually paying for it.
ign.com
Ważne