- 0 Posts
- 84 Comments
I feel like most people who sing praises for Alyx only do so because it was their first VR game. (a lot of people bought a headset just for it.) It’s decent game, but without VR it’s nothing special.
Sucks that VR is still a niche product, despite it being an obtainable consumer product for almost a decade now (edit: and affordable for over half a decade now). When the OG Rift and Vive first dropped, I imagined it being as popular as traditional gaming within 5 years. Yet here we are 9 years later and we still don’t have epic, 50+ hour AAA experiences in VR because hardly anyone owns a headset. Every VR game feels like an indie title.
I don’t know how old you are, but I feel like younger people say this more often than older people.
As someone who saw the transition from 8-bit to 16-bit to 32/64-bit in their childhood, graphics were everything from the 80s until at least the 2000s. Each new generation was leaps and bounds better than the last; I remember the discussions in the playground being centered around nothing but graphics every time a new console was announced. Nobody talked about the games.
Nowadays we have incremental updates at best, so now people care less and less about graphics like they used to. Not me, though. I’m still a graphics slut and an absolute whore for path traced games. I’ll play a game I don’t enjoy if it has the latest in graphics tech.
Well the game is out and luckily the rumors weren’t true.
With a medium-density city, I get about 40 FPS @ 4K in the sequel. With the same-sized city, I used to get 20 FPS in the original, so twice the FPS is a massive improvement IMO. But people are still salty cause we live in a world where anything less than 60 FPS @ 1440p is unacceptable. Which is stupid as fuck cause you don’t need 240+ FPS in a city-building game with next to no action in it that would require such a high framerate.
It’s worth the cost, given the fact that a computer holds considerably more value in terms of usability. You can’t write a resume or edit videos on a Playstation, for example. (Well I’m sure you could if you were determined enough, but you get my point.) And like I said, accessories like controllers are generally more expensive on consoles, and you have to pay a monthly fee to play online. This stuff adds up quickly; you’ve paid less up front, yes, but in the long run you spent more on your console than you would on a PC over the course of its lifespan.
Not to mention that PCs work just as well in the living room on a giant TV. I’m typing this comment from such a setup. Keyboard in lap, mouse on either the armrest or a table directly to the right of it. It’s very comfortable.
Lastly, I get the resale argument, but it takes decades for most games to gain enough collector’s value to be worth my time to sell it (if it ever happens at all). More often than not, you’ll get $5-10 at best if you’re lucky. It’s cheaper in the long run to just take advantage of Steam sales, and there’s the added bonus of getting to keep your games forever.
edit: Also, mods.
Do “people still play this game.” This guy. It’s literally the #1 title on Steam
This article on their website goes into detail on exactly how they’re planning on fixing the traffic issues. The AI will actually change lanes this time!
Reminds me of the early days of PUBG, when they started banning people for using Reshade. Instead of, you know, fixing the blurry, desaturated graphics. They eventually added a sharpening setting but to this day the game still looks dull, which makes enemies hard to spot in a game that heavily relies on being able to see.
Aren’t layoffs the norm for the games industry? You hire a bunch of people to make your new AAA title. A few years later, the game is out and the bugs are fixed, and now you don’t need all these employees anymore. Rinse and repeat when you’re ready to make the next AAA title.
Not defending the practice, but developers shouldn’t be surprised when they’re laid off after the company deems that they’re no longer needed.
They should have called it CS: Source 2, then. The game hasn’t changed enough to be considered a sequel. They made the same amount of improvements to this one as they always have in the last. Doesn’t make sense to call it a full-blown sequel.
They probably figured that if Blizzard could get away with calling it Overwatch 2, despite being the same game, they probably could too.
So do you think the game is worth getting back into now, or should I just give up all hope at ever being half decent at this game?
Last time I played was in 2014. Started as a Silver I, and worked my way up to Gold 1. I was never a competent player. I feel like if I try to get back into it now, the game will just be full of the same old players from past CS titles and I’ll still stand zero chance of ever getting gud. Or do you think the sequel will bring in enough new players that I might do alright?
The GPU has less than 10% the CUDA cores of a 4090, a GPU that can’t hit 120 FPS in most modern games @4K without DLSS. No way in hell will the Switch 2 hit 120 FPS @1080p, not without some extreme DLSS upscaling and some serious graphical compromises… Proper RT is completely out of the question.
This thing won’t even be able to keep up with the PS5, a 5 year old console. It will compete with the Steam Deck, however.
That said, I miss the days when Nintendo cared about graphics. But at this point it’s been over 25 years since those days. That’s almost as long as it’s been since I last enjoyed a Mario or Zelda game. Between all this and the fact that they sue their fans, I am so done with Nintendo. I feel like I’ve outgrown them anyway.