Either that, or the powerful gaming PC you put the Switch 2 money towards that will eventually emulate the Switch 2. Seems like a better investment than buying a locked down console with a GPU less powerful than a RTX 3050 that can only play $80 games.
KDE’s built in screen keyboard is broken (Using Steam’s keyboard). GNOME keyboard does work fine.
Autologin is on and screen locking is off due to a broken keyboard.
Manual installation if hhd, steam, flatpak, lutris may required a physical keyboard for first setup.
KDE wallet is on to protect (non-file) data. (Wifi passwords, chrome/Firefox login, etc…)
JamesDSP is used as pulse/easyEffects may need a reset as the audio may “break” when resuming from suspend.
I didn’t want a non-vanilla Debian system (Bazzite), so I chose to manually install Debian and have a nice Debian setup. Besides those issues, everything works pretty good (no crashes, hiccups.)
Well no shit. He figured out that as long as you never “release” a finished game, you’re not going to be blamed for “bugs” while still collecting money on in-game purchases.
There’s a reason he made sure that the in-game store was perfected and ready to go long before the game was anywhere near completed. It’s been the plan ever since he and his team realized that the ultimate scope was likely out of their reach.
If massive universe sums like that were technically feasible all of the other studios would have done it. They were overly ambitious and didn’t understand the limits
In terms of immersion I think they’ve done a great job. Played during a free weekend. But they need to aim for a gameplay loop, polish, and release. Not this feature creep mentality
Nope, it’s real time travel with no FTL. The reason it’s “finished” is that it takes hundreds of real life years to get anywhere, so they have plenty of time to populate the world’s before the first players arrive.
Yeaaah, but they pulled the exact same thing Star Citizen did initially. They overpromised and underdelivered heavily. It took them years to get where it is now.
Lastly, the installation threshold won’t be retroactive, so only new installations made after the policy’s announcement will count toward reaching the Runtime Fee thresholds.
Second-biggest chunk of the console market, effectively necessary for the PC market, gobbling up studios and publishers like fucking Galactus, and these empty suits still treat “making less money than the number we pulled from our asses” as losing money.
“Sold out” doesn’t mean anything. For the last four generations, Sony has deliberately underproduced consoles at launch, specifically to claim ‘It’s flying off shelves! We can’t keep it stocked!’ This free publicity stunt even worked for the PS3… which struggled for years.
That said, yeah, apparently the Xbox whatever-it’s-called sells about half as many units per year, compared to either the PS5 or Switch. Rough.
Not sure if running from the cart slot is permitted to even detect anything not properly signed by Nintendo. Which means this one is squarely for “backups” and nothing else.
It does have a specific niche: users of OLED models that just want to play “backups” and don’t want to bother soldering chips to their products. A few people will like the hassle-free multicarts.
Just using an SD card requires modding your Switch to run homebrew and, er, “backups,” right?
A properly constructed cartridge that can masquerade as a retail Switch cartridge would make owners who aren’t willing to modify their console very happy indeed. That’s how the various NDS/3DS carts work – just plug and play (literally).
Correct! The newer models (including all OLED versions) were already patched from the factory (or more accurately, redesigned to prevent the soft-mod from working).
I don’t seem to recall Nintendo making me pay anything for something I didn’t want.
I’m 100% in favour of emulation and whatnot, but I don’t understand what your problem is.
Remakes, re-releases and ports? What’s the big deal? If you had BotW on the WiiU, don’t buy it on the Switch. TotK came out on the Switch, so they’re still releasing new games.
Again, I love the emulation scene and I know piracy is important for game preservation. I don’t understand what your complaint is, though…
Because then you could buy any old SD card and Nintendo makes no money from you. This way Nintendo can sell you the same NAND flash except wrapped in a propriety Nintendo container with the multiple orders of magnitude price increase to pad the bottom line. They can also pursue you for civil or criminal charges if you attempt to break into the container of flash charging you with copyright infringement and attempted hacking.
Edit: ignore my post. Its not a Nintendo first party product.
Lol, you've made some assumptions there. It's not a Nintendo product. Nintendo would NEVER release any kind of flash cart themselves, as they're begging to be used for pirated games.
Everything you've said about game carts are basically why we'll never see an officially licensed product like this from Big N themselves.
With that in mind, it still makes no sense as a product because you can run games off the SD card already (I assume. Very out of touch with Switch hacks)
It makes perfect sense as a product because running game backups off an SD card without any hardware modding only works on the oldest console version. If you have a Lite or OLED (or even just the patched original model) you need a mod chip which is not an easy install.
That’s what a flashcart is. It’s a cartridge with an SD card in it, which has game ROMs on it. You can see a microSD card in the flashcart in the video.
I’ve got a 7900XTX Ultra, and FSR2 does literally nothing, which is hilarious.
100% resolution scale, 128 FPS.
75% resolution scale … 128 FPS.
50% resolution scale, looking like underwater potatoes … 128 FPS.
I don’t know how it’s possible to make an engine this way, it seems CPU-bound and I’m lucky that I upgraded my CPU not too long ago, I’m outperforming my friend who has an RTX 4090 in literally all scenes, indoor, ship, and outdoor/planet.
He struggles to break 70 FPS on 1080p Ultra, meanwhile I’m doing 4K Ultra.
I had no idea it was a problem on Radeon GPUs. I saw a few people complaining about not seeing the stars, but I didn’t have a clue what they were talking about since it was always fine for my Nvidia card.
It is priced at 60 to 70 dollars (fuck that still hurts)
It has a solid OFFLINE story mode.
If they try pull 100 dollar bullshit or fill it with micro transactions then I am out. Also I will not pre order this game (I didn’t with 5) I will wait until its out and I hear good things from the players.
Just like I did with 5. Had coworker who was bragging about the game every day. Finally and picked up a copy at Vintage Stock. This is the original PS3 version only one I have.
I only recently started playing again specifically because I found out that all the missions in online mode that required you to be in a public lobby are now able to be ran in a private lobby. Playing in a solo lobby is basically like getting more SP story (there are story missions in GTAO; it’s not all races and DM). Don’t have to deal with cheaters or asshats.
Exactly. $100 is a lot of money, however games are cheaper than ever these days (adjusted for inflation) and $100 for no micro transactions sounds fair.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t buy it at that price either. I‘d wait for a sale…
To respond to yours though, I’d say it depends on how much content there is! If a game can easily take 1000 hours with no degradation of enjoyment, I would pay $100 for it
Edit to add: I realize this didnt exactly address your question, but I’m not sure what percentage since it heavily depends on the quality and quantity of content
For me personally, I find it really easy to add “hours” to a game’s runtime, and I’d sooner pay more for a higher quality experience and a shorter runtime. I’ve spent about a fifth of that 1000 mark in both Baldur’s Gate 3 and Elden Ring, and they’d have been worth $100 to me. Indiana Jones was worth every bit of the $70 I paid, and it took me under 20 hours.
The only full price game I recall ever buying was Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 (back when £35 was the standard "full price" price point). Now that one was worth it, but no other AAA game that I can think of has justified the cost to me. Once we're talking about that amount of money there's a lot of other things I would get more enjoyment from.
I think I paid about £10 for GTA V. I'd maybe go to £15 or £20 these days, but beyond that I simply have other things I could play.
Meh I’d drop 100 plus on standard night out. I dont buy many games but buying God of War Ragnarok for 30 and getting 100 hours of entertainment was well worth it, to the point I regret not buying it full price day one.
There are many things I'd spend more on, but gaming is something that I can spend a lot of hours on without necessarily enjoying. As in, the experiences are often weirdly compulsive and before I know it I've tanked eighty hours without really enjoying it all that much.
I collected all the submarine collectibles in GTA V - do I think that was more fun than a party with friends? Absolutely not. Did it take more time? Most definitely.
If the biggest game of the decade charges $100, every triple A game will charge the same, and other games will probably be more expensive as well, and in most cases it’ll be more money for the same steadily decreasing quality, at least in the triple A market.
Because Rockstar is going to do it and sell a gorillion copies, so it’s basically a guarantee that everyone else will jump on the opportunity. And once every game is $100, what are people going to do, stop buying video games? I find that unlikely anymore. They’ll bitch and complain about it and sales might drop a little on average but studios will survive. And now we have a new price floor set forever.
I think yes, people will stop buying video games (at that price). There are very few games that carry the demand that GTA does, and customers have shown with the likes of Suicide Squad that they won’t just buy anything that marketing tells them to. Meanwhile, customers are very aware of the options available to them for free.
You’ve got more faith in the purchasing public than I do, then. I’ve been watching them buy a new copy of the same COD slop every year for a fresh $60 basically since I’ve been old enough to buy my own video games.
People like what they like, and the core of CoD hasn’t changed enough to dissuade people, in general, yet it still has bad years where it doesn’t do as well as it did this year.
I think it will be 80 dollars, with bigger editions available, eg. including online mode. For me, the 30fps is the most annoying, I was never a performance fanatic, but I’m used to 60 now.
I'm convinced they would have done so much better if it hadn't been Epic exclusive. I know more than one person who won't play it on PC because of this.
It's a great game otherwise.
It also likely wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t an epic exclusive (they funded it). I do wish they could have gotten someone else to publish it of course, but I’m thankful the game exists at all, it’s really outstanding
Because Crysis looked good, Chris Roberts mandated that Star Citizen would use Cryengine 3.
To make astronomically large spaces fit in the game engine from 2009, they made everything infinitesimally small.
So now due to the inaccuracy inherent in floating point calculations, instead of invisibly nudging things a few millimeters in the wrong direction, teleports people hundreds of feet out of their ships into space if they bump into a physics object, ladder, elevator, etc.
This is what happens when an ideas guy with no technical knowledge is making technical decisions.
Jesus fucking christ, that was their fundamental approach?!
… Did they ever come anywhere close to a dynamic server model, with dynamically sized in game zones being handled by dynamically changing server clusters, dependant on player count in an area?
I remember making some comments in a thread in the main SC forums about it almost a decade ago that were basically to the effect of: that’s almost certainly impossible to pull off with enough fidelity / low lag to actually work in a real time, absurdly open world shooter game, but if they could pull it off it would basically be the greatest achievement in game networking history.
Meshing tests have gone up to 2000 and the shards that were left on overnight were 300-500. The current evocati build of 4.0 has meshing enabled, just limited to 100 for now
This is not even true, they rewrote the engine to support native 64-bit precision to let them fit large spaces, they didn’t just make everything small. They basically employ all the people that used to make Cryengine since Crytek went out of business, so the engine they are building is actually pretty good.
I am engine developer, but even to this day you can clearly see Cryengine 3.x issue in star citizen.
They simulate zero-g areas as a Cryengine underwater map. You routinely see stuff floating as if in water even on planets with gravity.
You can also witness strange bugs that confirm the size issue (that they made everything extremely small in a Frankenstein version of a Cryengine map); one example would be your footmarks suddenly becoming massive.
The completely fucked up physics in sc (e.g. tanks bouncing like beachballs) is also a legacy of Cryengine 3.0.
Classic, the person who doesn’t know what they’re talking about is SO sure that they know the truth. So much so they’re out here correcting people and handing out false info.
so the engine they are building is actually pretty good
Keep living in a false reality pal. I’m sure you k or so much more than the engine dev who replied to you.
wccftech.com
Ważne