Companies like meta and Amazon can’t be trusted with gaming, it’s just a silly side project to them. If I was working at a studio acquired by either I would be shit scared for the studios longevity.
Yeah, I eventually found a Wikipedia page about Amazon Game Studios, they still exist and make games, and it looks like they only make mediocre stuff even when they have chances to make something interesting (like King of Meat, that seems to be a well received game, but has awful name, is too pricey, and is almost unknown, making the online too small)
It’s a bug in our simulation. If you’re poor and you lose a little money, you go bankrupt. But if you’re rich and you burn a fuckton of money, you can buffer overflow into richness and go back on top.
Oh look, that completely predictable outcome of an obviously stupid fucking idea, that people still felt the need to argue with me about so many years ago despite it being obviously doomed for failure.
I’ve always appreciated that they stole the name from Snow Crash. Like Zuck completely unironically named his company after a technological dystopian hellscape infected with a virus that destroys people’s brains. Honestly, I don’t think there’s a better name for Facebook.
I mean, Neal Stephenson coined the term “metaverse” to reference a virtual world not limited to gaming but to all kinds of business and commerce and social interactions.
Zuck’s concept for the metaverse was basically the same thing. I’d be surprised if the connection wasn’t intentional.
completely predictable outcome of an obviously stupid fucking idea
Nah, it could have worked if Meta started by
sell the hardware to businesses and schools at a loss, with a requirement users be able to take the sets home.
Publish standards to allow all apps to have multiplayer and compatible full body avatars, same control scheme, movement, etc.
buying up VRChat and any other apps with a large user base, refactoring them for compatibility.
Develop and release free multiuser apps, from virtual office/meetings to virtual movies to home decor.
Somehow FB didn’t even try to exploit the same effects that forced everyone into Apple, MS, and FB.
To be clear, its for the best, the end result of FB giving out millions of headsets at a loss would have been making even more money selling much more precise user data, and virtual nikes and shit.
ChatVR, RecRoom, Roblox, BattleBit, Project Loom (Which Google killed for no reason, but it wasn’t because of lack of success), and of course the OG, Second Life.
Hell you could even make the arguement for Elite Dangerous and Star Citizen if they ever finish it.
Some of those projects haven’t just been successful they’re so successful that they are starting to affect government policy.
How have they affected government policy, beyond Roblox probably causing some laws being passed about exploitation and protection of minors?
You have a point, I think the big thing FB failed to capitalize on is that someone who wants to use ChatVR or Roblox has to go into chatVR or roblox. FB had an opportunity to build an entire ecosystem they control, and they failed to get anyone inside of it.
I genuinely have no idea how they managed to spend that much money and not get a single decent app. Horizons literally looked like a tech demo someone slapped together for a gamejam or something.
Yes I have. And they all act as independent games, not the centralized hub for all work and play “ready player one” style that meta was pitching this whole things as. Those non meta products being semi successful games doesn’t mean the overarching master plan for the metaverse was ever feasible, or even desired. Facebook didn’t have a good game to tout in the end, let alone the rest of it. Despite the billions they spent on whatever the fuck they spent it on.
It really seems YOU don’t know what we’re talking about.
The real selling point would be that everyone else is using it and you need to use it to interact with them, same with FB. How many people are still forced to maintain a FB account to talk to their boomer relatives?
But also 100% predictable. Sad, but not unexpected.
For reference, I could absolutely take a job in the next couple weeks with a $50k signing bonus where I get to shoot people in the face with impunity, but I also know that the Nuremberg Trials were a thing. Also, I’m not a horrible human.
They had said on release (a few years ago) that they were selling the base model LCD just a bit above “at-cost” to try to break it into the market and capture share. It worked.
Now that RAM prices have >3x’ed, they would likely be selling that model at a significant loss if they keep manufacturing it. Completely logical move.
Bad for the consumer, but RAM being sucked up by shitty never-accurate, lying plagerism machines with the goal of replacing jobs for extra corporate profit is also bad for the consumer and probably a large part of the cause behind this production stop.
To a certain extent, this is the equivalent of being shocked that Intel discontinued 386 production. Or that Google is no longer manufacturing Pixel 3s. It’s the nature of the industry.
If they’ve got their heart set on an LCD model, it looks like eBay has a number of secondhand ones.
I don’t own a Steam Deck or intend to — I have more than enough portable electric devices capable of running games that I lug around already — but if I were going to get one, it looks like the OLED model has a 25% larger battery, which would be interesting to me.
I’m not 100% but I’m pretty sure the bigger battery is there to compensate for the increased power use of the OLED rather than being supplementary. Keep in mind, the OLED is also a 50% step-up in refresh rate up it likely just balances out. There’s likely a plethora of reviews out there that quickly confirm that, or prove me full of it. Either way…
All other things being equal (same game, settings and refresh rate / fps limit), the OLED and LCD models have comparable power draw.
If anything, the OLED max power draw at 15W TDP is lower, usually around 23W max versus 26/27W for the LCD iirc.
Based on the screenshot in the article, the OLED model has longer playtime; Valve says that the LCD model has “2-8 hours of gameplay” and the OLED “3-13 hours of gameplay”.
Though they do also say that this is “context-dependent”, and I’m sure that you can come up with pathological cases for each. Like, a game that has a nearly all-white screen and runs at 90 Hz is probably relative worst-case for the OLED in terms of battery life, and a game that has a dark screen and runs at a locked framerate of 60 Hz is probably relative worst-case for the LCD.
I have an LCD one, got my partner an OLED one last year. It’s noticeably better looking with a sightly larger screen and the battery life is decidedly better. I got the LCD when it was steeply discounted and don’t regret it, but the oled one is a nicer device. Thumbsticks are broader and it’s also a bit lighter.
I don’t care to find the source right now, but around the time when the OLED came out, the battery performance was nominally better in third-party tests. It did come down to specifics in what you played (game optimization) and how you set the power profiles, but the extra battery didn’t add much in terms of playtime—maybe an hour extra in real world use cases.
I don’t know if that’s still the case; it could be that Valve has OLED specific improvements by this point, but I suspect that it still would not be a significant enough point for someone to decide upon a model just on battery specs.
The main appeal of the LCD one was you could get the cheapest Steam Deck, then swap out the hard drive for a 1TB+ drive. The total cost was super cheap, far less than a Switch 2 anyway.
It sucks to see it gone, but the whole economy around tech is fucked, so I guess it’s another casualty.
The oled model is roughly the same price as the original Steam Deck launched. And there are so many improvements, not just screen and battery. And given that other devices get more expensive over time, and with the higher RAM prices than before, its actually a good price; relatively speaking.
I have nothing negative to say about the Touch Pads, in fact I fall in love. But the Touch Screen is not very good, especially compared to who good touch works on smartphones in example. Didn’t know it was improved too!
No, you ignore that both models are different classes. You compare 64gb model without SSD against 512gb SSD model. It’s like saying the 2tb model is more expensive.
They made an art piece that tows the line in the minefield so hard that it is causing explosions when people try to follow along…
Yeah ok, so sounds like they accomplished their goal in the art sense and just won’t get the wide audience and monetary rewards for making an art piece that hurt people.
Theyre getting more attention from all these articles every day than they ever had before for sure. Theyre loving this. None of their games have had much success, reviews low, player counts near 0… steamdb.info/developer/Santa+Ragione/
I dont care what obscure indie awards they won, 99% of people commenting, complaining, etc have never heard of the studio or their games, even within the indie space, the numbers show that.
Yeah, honestly this is a fantastic ad campaign for them and they are in fact getting rewarded for towing that line by getting the conversation on them.
Steam chose not to distribute it because it they understood an early build to include children in sexual situations. Further builds did not dissuade them from the original decision.
Epic, who originally was going to distribute based on the developer filling out some form chose not to after filling it out themselves and finding it had a higher rating (adult only) at the last minute.
The developer speculated it was about a specific scene, but based on both steam and epic there are fundamental concerns about the content that led to no distributing on their platforms, which is not banning, that do not align with the story the developers are presenting. It is not likely to be about one scene that was in an earlier build that was the issue for them.
The important thing is that the game is not BANNED in any way whatsoever. It is available on fewer distribution platforms, which reduces visibility, but is not banning any more than exclusive deals or limited releases are banning on other platforms.
Personally I get the impression that the developers see the content very differently than steam and epic because the developers focus on intent and steam and epic focus on what actually exists in the game.
ban 1 of 3 verb ˈban banned; banning; bans Synonyms of ban
transitive verb 1 : to prohibit especially by legal means ban discrimination Is smoking banned in all public buildings? also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of ban a book ban a pesticide 2 : bar entry 2 sense 3c banned from the U.N.>
So, by that definition and the definition everyone else is using, the game has been banned from various marketplaces for games. Context matters. In this context ban is used EXACTLY the same way we talk about banned books at the library.
No, banned is the right word colloquially. The media is not eligible to be distributed in the monopolistic or anti-competitive web service run by Valve. It wasn't banned by a government, but it was indeed banned.
Steam is the one with monopoly power, and the Horses developer has said that publishers didn’t event wasn’t to publish the game if it cannot be on Steam. This argument isn’t applicable to Epic, let alone Humble, which ended up reinstating the game within the day.
theverge.com
Najnowsze