played the OG version on release. there is a “point of no return” message for the end of the game. If you complete game or save after that point and reopen that save you’re locked into that ending based on what you did prior to crossing the point of no return.
so the playable sections all come before this — so if you missed something after completing you can reload your “Meet [Person] At Embers Bar” save (the point of no return) — go do it with your endgame character and then optionally revisit the final section if you like.
from what I gather on loading up an old save after this patch you’ll have to re spec your character and may have missed minor things, but can start all the new content from your …Embers save.
From a new player perspective you can choose to do the DLC or the vanilla game at any order or at any point- gated by your character level and progression, similar to how Fallout DLC works.
(tbf It never really bothered me, cyberpunk is one of my favourite games ever. The story, the voice acting the goofy and scary side missions. For me the jesus pose and the teleporting cops where forgivable.)
I’ve tried to keep my spoilers to a minimum, but from what I’ve read, MAXTAC has their own siren. At 5* wanted level, when you hear their siren, a little bit of poo will come out.
Police are apparently relentless too - at all wanted levels. Oh, and straying into a gang’s territory with police on your tail can lead to interesting results lol.
I seriously can’t wait! I love netrunning, now I can be the netrunning demon everyone fears!
I’m referring to the spoilers for the changes incoming in update 2.0.
Not everyone likes to read what’s changed and want to experience it first hand. MAXTAC was not in the base game and is a huge part of the consequences of your actions on the street.
On steam will the update automatically install? I am finally like 90% done with the main sorry line and I would rather finish it as is before starting over to do all the side quests.
Afaik it is impossible to not update the game automatically if you have internet. But it could be that it will be possible to downgrade the game to an earlier version although that depends on the dev making this function available.
On Steam rollbacks are possible with the ‘betas’ feature, but few developers use them. Total War: Warhammer 3 allows rollbacks after bigger updates because those typically break older saves. The option to roll back is hidden in the properties option.
Seems like you’d have to jump through hoops to avoid updating and continuing to play it while connected to Steam normally. #1 you should go into the Properties of the game and set it to not automatically update. But that won’t fix your issue, as it will trigger the update when you attempt to launch it. Also set it to not allow updates while playing the game, just in case.
Some games you can go into the steam directory and launch the .exe yourself, and that might work. There’s also Steam Offline Mode, but you may want to set it up today before the update drops and test how it works (I’ve never used it). Maybe you’ll have luck disconnecting from the internet before launching the game after the update is available. If you’re not able to completely disconnect your machine for whatever reason, you can get a program like NetLimiter and block the steam applications from accessing the internet temporarily.
If you find the appmanifest file for the game (it’s in the steamapps folder where your games are installed) and set it to read-only, Steam can’t update the game. I think it’s based on the appid so the file should be called appmanifest_1091500.acf. You can open it up like a textfile where it’ll have the name of the game inside if you wanted to make sure.
The article does a good job of summarizing everything they changed and improvements, but I feel like pcgamer's headline is sort of leaving off a "... after reducing scope". For instance, the multiplayer mode that had been announced before launch. I also think I read they planned on multiple DLCs but they reduced that down to just this one? Regardless all my friends seem to enjoy the game so I'm sure it's a fun game to play
It’s interesting that this comes out during the FTC vs Microsoft case.
As much as Google shot itself in the foot, as usual, this also shows the anti-competitive landscape in gaming. One of the biggest issues Google had was convincing AAA studios to develop games for their “console”. Meanwhile, Microsoft is solving that by buying studios like Zenimax, Mojang, and soon Actiblizz. If you own the studio, they’re guaranteed to develop for your console, and they may choose not to develop for any competitor’s consoles.
But it has always been that way, with first party titles and exclusives , even purchasing studios like Rare or Psygnosis, its not like a brand new situation that developed right after Google announced Stadia.
If Google had done even any research, I would have started by looking at the PS1 launch and how Sony broke into a market then dominated by Nintendo and Sega with their exclusives, they would have secured a multi year pipeline of AAA titles before launch.
This is a mess Google could have completely avoided with some basic research and discussion with the remaining independent studios. Instead they launched and assumed that they could fix this shit later, rather than making an informed decision on if they actually had a real chance.
its not like a brand new situation that developed right after Google announced Stadia
No, but it’s telling that one of the world’s richest companies ran into this problem. It’s pretty typical of Google to be arrogant and not understand the market they were trying to break into. Also typical of them to give up when it turned out to be a hard problem to solve. But, still, they chose to give up rather than make what (for them) would have been a reasonably small investment to buy a few AAA studios.
It seems to me that to have been successful in this attempt they would have either had to become a major console manufacturer with their own exclusives (maybe not a market they wanted to be in) or to be the junior partner working with another console manufacturer, where they controlled the server side and the other company controlled the client-facing and studio-facing side. But, Google rarely does partnerships like that. You’re right that it really seems like they didn’t go into it with their eyes open. They seemed to just arrogantly assume that their technological superiority would be enough to disrupt consoles without having to do what everybody else did.
But this is a situation of their own making, anybody even remotely cognizant of how Sony and Microsoft entered the market, even Steam has lessons to share, would have been aware that they needed that pipeline of AAAs, and exactly how expensive AAA titles are to make. Its usually public record how much one of the manufacturers paid to buy studios as well, the order of magnitude of cash needed to properly enter the market are hardly secret.
Either they thought they could bully their way into getting them or they thought they didn’t need them, which is even worse, way way worse. They could have spent the money the others are in this space but didn’t, this is the main reason this fell on its arse. They can moan all they like about the price of admission but they could have afforded to pay it if they wanted or lobbied to change it before hand rather than wasting a few billions on this.
It will be very interesting at the level Apple pitch their new gaming service if the rumors are true. Do they go after the mobile lite eco system that Netflix is cobbling together or do they go all in?
I’m really excited to play with all these changes. I have just shy of 200 hours for 2 playthroughs, and virtually every change they’ve made here seems like it’ll improve things a lot.
Seriously the assumption of free time that corpos have for their consumer base is WILD, but it just feeds into the ‘must have 100% market share’ mentality that drives the culture as we lose every shred of our living moments on anything but living
In best case, I will play the game after the first patch after 2.0 + PL. Good that I’m still in my first playthrough in Baldurs Gate 3. So if the patch comes around the weekend of the 6th of October, I should be fine.
Oh boy can’t wait to have cups that burn a hole right through their coolers
I’d really love it if we’d just have a generation or two where they focused on making cpus more efficient and less hot rather than ramping power every generation , same with gpus
This only got bad with the most recent generation of CPUs. AMD 5xxx series is very efficient as demonstrated by Gamers Nexus. The Intel CPUs from 2500k to idk, 8xxx series? were efficient until they started slapping more cores and then cranking the power on them.
Yes the second thing about cranking power and cores is what I’m talking about.
Also, as far as gpus, the 2000 series was ridiculously power hungry at the time, and it looks downright reasonable now. It’s like the Overton window of power consumption lol.
I dunno, I ran a 2080 on the same PSU that I used on a 2013 build, a 650W seasonic. Got some graphs? Power consumption didn’t seem to jump that bad until the latest gen.
My current 3090 is a power hog though, that’s when I’d say it started for Nvidia (3000 series). For AMD, 7000 series CPUs, and I’m not really sure for Intel. 9900k was the last Intel CPU I ran, it seemed fine. I was running a 9900k/2080 on the same PSU as the 2500k/570 build.
As for as the 2080 goes, like I said, it was big FOR THE TIME, and power hungry FOR THE TIME. It’s still reasonable especially for today’s standards
As for as the last two gens, 3000 and 4000 series, they are known to draw more than their rated power requirements, which, for their min recommended psu wattage, 3080 was 50 watts more than the 2080 (750w), and 4080 was 100 w more than that (850w)
To add to that, both of these gens of cards, when doing graphics intensive things like gaming, can overdraw power and have been known to cause hard shutdowns in pcs with PSUs that are even slightly higher rated than their min rec. Before these last two gens you could get away with a slightly lower than rated wattage PSU and sacrifice a little performance but that is definitely no longer the case.
And sure, the performance to watts used is better in the 3080, but they also run 10+ degrees hotter and the 4000 series even moreso.
I just hope the 5000 series goes the way of power consumption refinement rather than smashing more chips onto a board or vram fuckery like with the 4060, like I’d be happy with similar performance on the 5000 series if it was less power hungry
The 7 series are more efficient than the 5 series. They just are programmed to go as fast as thermals allow. So the reviewers that had really powerful coolers on the cpus saw really high power draw. If instead you set a power cap, you get higher performance per watt than the previous generations.
Having the clocks scale to a thermal limit is a nice feature to have, but I don’t think it should have been the default mode.
Intel became less efficient because of how long they were stuck on 14nm. In order to compensate to beat amd in performance mindshare, they needed to push the clocks hard.
Overtime, cpus have been sitting closer to max clock, defeating the purpose of overclocking to many, where adding 1GHz was not out of the ordinary. Now getting 0.5GHz is an acheivement.
I felt the same when the current-gen CPUs were announced, but when I looked closer at AMD’s chips, I learned that they come with controls for greatly reducing the power use with very little performance loss. Some people even report a performance gain from using these controls, because their custom power limits avoid thermal throttling.
It seems like the extreme heat and power draw shown in the marketing materials are more like competitive grandstanding than a requirement, and those same chips can instead be tuned for pretty good efficiency.
Yeah I’m talking about Nvidia and Intel here, but tbh ryzen 4000 cpus run pretty hot, but they also optimized ryzen quite a bit before they changed to this new chip set, which makes sense to me. Seems like Nvidia and Intel are worried about what looks good power wise on paper rather than optimization sometimes.
AMD uses 290/390 to compete with Nvidias 970, people buy Nvidia, shoulda bought a 390 meme is born after the 3.5 gb vram controversy happens. AMd mocked for high power consumption.
AMD releases 6000 series gous to compete with Nvidias Ampere line, uses a notibly significant lower power draw, people still buy Nvidia.
That’s because Nvidia still has the leg up on rtx, but that doesn’t mean Nvidia shouldn’t be thinking about it. I’m not talking about what the market directs them to do, I’m talking about what I hate personally
I mean they did this generation technically. All of the rtx 4000 cards sans the 4090 are fairly efficient… only because nvidia moved the names of the gpu for each tier thats not the halo card.
Point is, you cant have everything and people generally prioritize performance first. Because efficiency has rarely gave either gpu company more profit gpu wise.
If you cared about efficiency, Nvidia answer to people would be buying their RTX 4000 SFF Ada(75w ~3060ti perf) or RTX 6000 Ada… if you can afford it.
One of the main issues with Stadia is that they didn’t even do the basics. I saw basically no marketing, and on top of that, I heard all kinds of rumors about the business model that were entirely false. They made no effort to combat the misinformation. It was never the case that you literally had to purchase the game on top of the subscription fees, but that was like the number one issue brought up in every discussion.
There was a bad experience version you could use without a subscription to games you purchased outright, and they included "free" games with your subscription, but to get a reasonable experience you had to pay for both.
The subscription was only necessary if you wanted to play in 4K or wanted "free" monthly games. Everything else worked just fine without the sub, with no change to performance.
From everything I can see, you did have to buy games on Stadia. They would give you a free game a month, but if that wasn't the game you wanted to play, you had to buy it. The base version of Stadia was free, but the Pro version gave you a discount on games - it did not make them free.
This is the official support forum and there are many Q&A's about purchasing games:
... If you have an Android device, you can also try via the Stadia app to purchase games (once purchased, you can play them everywhere, on mobile, TV or PC).
I couldn’t figure out how to do anything with one without paying the subscription. The interface was horrible and clearly designed to force you into subscribing before you could even use the thing.
It was never the case that you literally had to purchase the game on top of the subscription fees
It depends on the game. There were a bunch of games under “Stadia Play” that came along with the subscription, GamePass style. And then there were games you had to outright purchase.
The main problem with stadia was Google. I knew it was doomed from the start and that’s why I never bothered with it. I actually know a lot of people that didn’t bother with it because it was from Google. It’s basically a self fulfilling prophecy at this point that most of their shit ends up on the Google graveyard.
A lot of people actually don’t trust Google anymore since they’ve already been screwed over many times by them.
pcgamer.com
Aktywne