- 0 Posts
- 134 Comments
Saw 4xxx and thought this was huge.
4060 TI is a year old and $400 on release. And they used an outdated test that doesn’t get benefits from the 4xxx series GPUs like hardware ray tracing or frame generation.
Factor in that stuff, and $250 seems like a sensible price point for people who don’t want/need that stuff.
I got as far as seeing it on a store shelf
It’s on shelves?
Most paid games don’t have a physical release because it adds costs these days, it’s surprising they have physical copies.
Is it just a free disc that tells the hardware to download it? Or some kind of collector’s edition with extra stuff?
But give it a try, quick play is quick play and you won’t get a good team comp, but I got to silver in ranked and people know what they’re doing most of the time. You won’t always get two tanks, but two heals and a tank is the worst I’ve seen.
Eh, it’s not really a “deck builder” like people think.
Like, it sounds weird because there’s literally cards and you select a deck for each player…
But just move past the cards/deck and think of it as a loadout and selecting what abilities you want each character to have. And the upgrade system really lets you fine tune what abilities you can use.
It’s a small piece of the gameplay, but the randomness it forces rather than just always using OP moves gives it a lot of replayability.
So, I don’t think the card mechanic was a problem other than turning people off before they tried it. I think it went free on PSN a while ago, and I was really hoping it would make it take off.
from what I’m TOLD was a decent game, but didn’t go anywhere:
It’s an amazing game.
The cards were a great way to handle combat, it was just a lot of new ideas, and the story parts slowed it down. If running around the abbey was something that could be turned off as an option and everything handled on a menu splash screen it would have done even better.
But my ‘okay’ computer is handling the game at max settings just fine.
Yeah, that’s the issue.
Your comp is running maxed setting at what you consider a serviceable framerate, while admitting your PC is just “okay”.
Everyone with a better comp than you, is also running at max setting, and seeing the graphics you are at probably close to the same average frames and dips. But we’re used to better graphics at higher frame rates with zero stutter/dips.
I’ve talked about this issue in the past, and it’s hard to explain. But a properly optimized game shouldn’t really run with everything maxed out on release except the very top hardware setup.
What’s currently max setting should be “medium” settings, because lots of people can handle it.
Your experience wouldn’t change at all, there’d just be the higher graphical settings available for people who could run them.
Think of it like buying the game on PS5 Pro, and then finding out that it plays exactly the same on the PS4. It’s not that you’d be mad that the PS4 people get a playable version, it’s that you don’t understand why that’s comparable to the newest gen console version. And compared to games that use your PS5 pro’s full power, it’s going to seem bad.
People (myself included) just assumed since it was UE5, they’d be at least giving us the options that UE5 was updated to support.
It seems they did it for future proofing the game, which 100% makes sense. Hopefully they add that stuff in with updates later.
Like, it doesn’t support hardware ray tracing…
And it doesn’t have non ray based lighting either. It forces everything to software ray tracing, which is a huge performance hit to people with hardware that can do ray tracing, but is completely unnoticeable to people with hardware that can’t do ray tracing. They may even see better graphics than a game that uses traditional lighting.
Like. I’m just a hobbyist nerd, I don’t really know all the in and outs of what’s going on with Stalker 2. But it seems like this is just a game that caters to the average PC gamer to the point everyone with an above average PC wasn’t even an afterthought.
I’m sure there’s going to be a lot of people who know more than me looking at lot closer at why the reaction to this game has been so varied.
3090 and 5800X3D.
Yeah. I’m 4070 super and 7800x3d
Like I said, I went in expecting it to look like Senue’s 2 on boot. And there was just no reason for me to have done that.
I’ll give it a month or so and then mess with settings/drivers/etc and it’ll probably be fine. It’s just even when I tried turning stuff down I was having issues, but I haven’t put a lot of effort into getting it right.
Just because the engine is capable of crazy stuff, doesn’t mean every game will push it to its full potential, and that’s fine. That’s how engines last for a long time and that’s good for all of us in the long run.
That’s what I mean.
Everybody had unrealistic expectations, myself included.
My PC isn’t a slouch, but everybody who got early play has top of the line shit and there’s a large discrepancy in PC hardware these days.
Apparently it’s not shaders, but I had to check what resolution it was at thinking it was throwing 720 by default or something. With everything cranked to 4k and only the normal performance hogs off the highest settings it looked bad. 1080p with everything down still had stuttering tho.
I didn’t put much effort in and my experience was launch day.
So people should definitely try for themselves if they have it from Xbox for PC for free…
I just expected it to be amazing on boot when I shouldn’t have.
Hugely disappointed in Stalker 2…
But after that article I’ll give it another shot sooner than I was going to. I never thought that horrible performance could have been shaders loading in the background.
If that’s what was going on, then they really need to make that more obvious, or lock people in a sort of training area until it’s done and then start the actual game.
A couple weeks and it’ll probably be a lot better.
But initial thoughts before the article, I think the mistake was watching huge budget games designed from the ground up to be a showcase for the engine, and assuming that would be what any third party studio could crank out.
UE5 has amazing potential, but it still needs good code run on good hardware to get Selene’s result.
The only thing that makes sense in my head as to why Until Dawn is underperforming is the game’s lack of promotion. Aside from a couple of trailers, I have barely seen Sony promote this remaster.
Couldn’t possibly be that people don’t want to keep paying new game prices for remasters…
People live rebuying decade old console exclusives on the next console generation.
It’s usually a pretty hard sell of “make the company you work at shittier to make more money”, especially since most of the employees probably know gabe personally (valve has less than 400 employees) and likely approve of his leadership.
And most of the ones with the high percent have been there since the beginning, probably close to Gabe’s age, looking towards retirement. They make good money, but retirement is expensive.
I mean. That link from this year said Microsoft was thinking 16 billion. 1% of that is 160 million.
Or they may die and their kids see dollar signs when a vote comes up
Steam is great now, it’s not debatable. But its naive to expect it indefinitely. 10 years, 20 years from now? It wouldn’t be surprising if Valve was a lot shittier than it is today
It won’t last forever
Usually it’s forced arbitration, you can’t sue
It really favors the company. Steam is explicitly saying no arbitration which levels the playing field.
Arbitration doesn’t save money. You still need lawyers.
What’s bigger is this explicitly says it allows class actions. Something that most prevent and require individual arbitration, consumers are better off when they can pool resources for lawyers against a giant corporation, especially since most would require an upfront payment for a large class action.
Not sure, apparently the 25% figure is really new, Wikipedia is sourcing something from 2017 that says he has 50+.
This is the most up to date I can find that attributes a source
https://www.guru3d.com/story/microsoft-reportedly-readies-billion-bid-to-acquire-valve-steam/
Insights from Dior, a prominent figure in the Counter-Strike community, reveal that Gabe Newell owns less than 25% of Valve. This suggests that a significant portion of Newell’s wealth is tied to his equity in the company. The decision to sell Valve wouldn’t rest solely with Newell; numerous employees who likely hold stock options could also have a say through a voting process if an offer were made.
So it sounds like a lot was given to employees from the beginning, which track with Gabe.
Then he may have cashed out a couple times, but I doubt that when he could just do the billionaire thing where he borrows against his stock counting on the value increasing enough to pay off the last with a new?
But then again Gabe is different and might not do that out of principle.
It’s not publicly traded, so I guess we don’t really know unless Valve discloses who owns what. Which I just realized is pretty concerning on its own.
Yeah, but Gabe is down to 25% ownership.
He could be pushed out at anytime. It’s this weird situation where if a serious challenger to Steam really takes off, the 75% may demand Steam gets shittier to make more money.
But Gabe won’t last forever anyways, who knows what will happen without him. Which means people do want some kind of challenger to prevent a monopoly, but that just makes the other scenario more likely
Steam is already a huge outlier
Why wouldn’t it?
It’s talking about two things “AI” which is actually a pretty good use of the label
-
Generatinga lower Rez screen and upscaling.
-
Generating addition frames based on what might happen in between real screens
There’s no valid reason not to use that. Hardware costs more so you’d be paying a lot more money for the same performance. With less people making that choice, the price differential would be even greater.
Like, this is right. They can’t make them without this for low enough people will buy it.
It’s facts bro
Frame generation is fucking huge.
Especially since it works best at high frame rates. Like, if you were playing 30fps doubling to 60 might be a perceptable difference because of how long it is in between frames.
But going from 60 to 120, it’s still 50% “fake” frames, but the time between “real screens” is much smaller allowing for more frequent corrections to what the “fake” frames are predicting.
So while it won’t help a bad computer run anything, it can help a “mid” computer make what it can run look a lot better, because you can crank up a bunch of options to maintain the fps you were getting without I.
Looks like about a hundred hit 120fps
https://www.pushsquare.com/guides/all-ps5-games-running-at-120fps
Performance is 60?
I thought it was 120 and that’s why this part made no sense:
According to Cerny, while 25% of PS5 owners have a 120 fps-capable TV (with 10% owning VRR displays), a vast majority of PS5 players will choose a game’s performance mode if available – with 75% of all users opting for higher framerates at the cost of visual quality.
But yeah, if 25% have 120 displays and performance mode only gets you 60 in some games, that’s a lot who will upgrade
Modern consoles with digital games already blur the lines on console generations, but like, very few games are even using the PS5 to max.
PC you can decide your own “generation”, and if you upgrade your PC, you don’t have to buy remakes, you just turn the settings up.
Between that and locking yourself to one entity to buy games from, there’s a lot of downsides to consoles and not many upsides left.
We got hella people, they got helicopters
They got the bombs and we got the…
we got the
I mean, triple A just meant a big studio made it.
So I’m assuming quadruple A is going to be a game from a large study thats recently been bought by a giant corporation and fucked with everything despite not knowing video games.
So yeah, that’s pretty much what AAAA means, although some end up decent
They’re going to clean up with it tho.
Any halfway decent Unreal 5 game will these days, the graphics are just nuts.
But this is a sequel to a classic and everything indicates it was really well done. Plus with all the war stuff going on, that’s going to play in for some people on the fence about paying full price and not waiting for a sale.
A lot of why it looks so good is unreal 5, which frankly at this point is pretty fucking unreal…
Black Myth Wukong is also Unreal 5, and has a benchmark tool on steam of just floating through the country side. I ran it maxed out and again with min settings to see the difference, and min settings is still awesome.
What I’m getting at is you can probably run Wukong’s benchmark on Steam deck and get a general idea how Stalker 2 will look.
It’s a good point tho, DC is compact and designed that way with a solid lore reason.
NA should be more spread out lore wise, and it is.
The big mistake was having the navigation pathing direct you to fast travel station to move about the same map. So if you tried to walk places in NA, it was likely to make you walk to the closest fast travel point, even if it’s in the opposite direction. Which prevents players from learning the map and getting lost when they realize what’s happening and don’t want the loading screen for fast travel.
Like, I agree with the guy, but it’s not a design problem, it’s a pathing problem.