I tried out Portal RTX, found the room where the light ball is casting shadows all around. It looked nice; but I also felt like I’ve seen the same effect imitated with regular rendering. Sure there might be slight differences, but I wouldn’t have spotted them.
Much as I trust Sony more than Meta, part of the issue is that 80% of the cool stuff from VR comes from indie teams running an ItchIO page or Patreon, not established publishers.
Supposedly, PSVR2 can work with PC now but I don’t know how refined that integration is.
I still see the PS5Pro as a bit dumb, but also not sure what Sony could easily do around this problem.
We’re at the graphical plateau where any improvements become extremely expensive, and increasingly hard to notice. Sure, we have 4K TVs and we’re not quite able to play all our games at 4K 120fps, but very few people care about that level of detail. Honestly, I don’t even know what Sony may be planning for the PS6 while still keeping it at a reasonable price.
The way in which Half-Life maintained a continuous viewpoint over long stretches of gameplay and landscape was always so immersive to me. Games like God of War and Dead Space did something similar, but Valve had an additional challenge.
They almost never take player control, instead relying on mere hints of where to look; they even have the character sequences scripted for wherever the player was standing. That all usually took a lot of their effort.
I could be biased because I even enjoyed toying with their choreography tool, which let you layer simple gestures together; so without making a new animation, you could have someone both lean forward and nod right, and point their thumb right.
On enemy variety, I see the critique of games like Zelda: BOTW and even realistic games like Hitman. Something those games have in common is very well-made enemy AI that presents you many ways to defeat them.
Half-Life: Alyx spoilersIt’s gonna be wild watching Valve try to explain that Eli was brought back from the dead in a prequel game that took place years before Half-Life 2, that 90% of their fans couldn’t play.
Not that it succeeded long term, but I salute Apple Arcade’s venture on this. It’s a subscription service that aimed to highlight iPhone games that had no monetization, and were usually small indie games with a fun idea.
I imagine a lawsuit would likely bring up the topic of how hard it would be for a developer to keep the game around past purchase.
For instance, imagine a massively multiplayer online game; everyone playing the game is acutely aware of how much server hardware is needed to maintain that online presence, and it’s unrealistic to assume it would exist forever.
That’s probably why attention was pushed onto The Crew. It’s a racing game that shouldn’t need much from a server, so it’s arguably unfair to tie it to that access and take it offline.
It annoys me how often my standpoint on topics on Lemmy has been “I hate the same people you do, but your reasoning for hating them makes so little sense.”
I think “Disclaimer: Product may explode and take out your eye” only goes so far in terms of warning consumers. Better to actually have something protecting them.
EDIT: My tired mind when I wrote that was just specifically annoyed at the use of disclaimers to excuse a negative trait of software/products. Basically, I was reminded of when Cyberpunk hit the issue of seizure content, and all they did was add a generic warning to the game. But, I really should have added: Sony attempting to use consumer protection to excuse PSN is also stupid. Basically, I’d gotten off topic.
No matter how many times I reread this comment, I don’t see how this reasoning would convince anyone - including yourself - of its position. The point about translation, for instance, not only feels like a non-sequitor but ignores the wealth of subjectivity that inherently goes into translating text to other languages.
I’m not trying to reject you just out of spite; I genuinely don’t think internet arguments like this are ever “winnable” for anyone. If you come up with a better description for what it is you oppose, feel free to mention it, but otherwise, I’d say do some self-reflecting.
I hadn’t realized the court was within Japan. Does Palworld conduct business inside the country? I’d think if it was never released there, Japan would have no basis to pull them into a foreign case.