- 0 Posts
- 153 Comments
Similarly, AMD had a couple of anime girl mascots for Zen/Ryzen.
What did they do to dead cells?
4·2 months agoA lot of people are really good at justifying the problems by completely missing the point as well. i.e people going “Oh you can just disable/hide/remove xyz” when the issue is that xyz shouldn’t be there at all or be opt in, rather than opt out.
Then there’s the people that listen to these justifications without a second thought or even parroting them, giving them extra legitimacy to other people that come across these takes.
Probably like 10 or something
Ron*
It wouldn’t surprise me if this was a way to avoid typical launch day server issues either.
Rather than have everyone dumped into their servers as once, they let things ramp up.
Though that could be giving too much credit considering it’s in alpha. Aloha would suggest its still far from release, probably too early to bother stress test the servers or w/e.
19·3 months ago
3·3 months agoIt kind of depends on the story being told.
Some stories may set up some interesting ideas/concepts that could become good stories in their own right.
However there are things that are better left just being suggested and left to the consumer’s imagination, rather than outright explained.
For example, Yakuza 0 was a fantastic way of handling extra backstory stuff, especially for Majima’s side of things. It gave players insight as to why the wacky batshit character is the way he is through the rest of the series. It also gives insight into Kiryu and Nishki’s relationship, adding more weight to what happens in the first game.
I think a poor example would be the way that Metal Gear Solid V expanded on the Cobra Unit from 3. It explained that their previously unexplained supernatural abilities were actually just due to one of V’s plot devices. It took away from the mystique of leaving the cobra units abilities and replaced it with something pretty mundane.
DO
NOT
REDEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEM
Give her bond extreme narcissism so that shes both Bond and the Bond Girl.
9·4 months agoExcept we have a few ACs that work with proton. battleye and EAC being the notable examples.
https://areweanticheatyet.com/
The issue isn’t that the ACs can’t work. It’s that they don’t run at the kernel level under linux and so some developers have concerns that the ACs wont be as secure.
Though given how things have been lately with MP games. You have to wonder if theyre even secure to begin with.
Under KDE, discover will send a system notification for updates.
Pretty sure other DEs do the same. But I can’t confirm since I only bother with KDE.
That sounds more like their issue if they struggle to switch software.
Let’s be honest, most of the time it’s a lack of willingness to learn how to use something or just ignorance. As opposed to anything else.
It’s not difficult to learn, most people just refuse to do so.
obnoxiously long animation, and that animation being set in stone once you trigger it. There is no aborting a sword-swing midway through to dodge or block.
The whole point of the animations being set in stone is to force the player to be mindful of their actions. Don’t commit to an attack unless you’re sure it’s safe to do so. Otherwise you’re going to get caught out.
The slow animations are a deliberate drawback to the more powerful weapons. Being able to swing an UGS around like it’s nothing would make for a fairly unbalanced weapon. If you want a weapon with quicker animations you probably want something more DEX focused. Just look at the Falcion’s animations compared to the Zweihander’s animations in Dark Souls for example. Zweihander puts out bigger damage numbers and thus attacks slower. Pretty basic balancing concept to have thing that does big damage be slower.
The lack of being able to abort moves is simply a way for the game to punish poor decisions. If you get caught out by a slow animation then you probably need to work on picking when to attack. A big part of the game is that it teaches the player through punishing mistakes. That’s why it forces you to commit to actions.
These only come across as clunky if you’re not learning from your mistakes and working around these deliberate limitations. Pick different weapons or pick better moments to attack/use an item so you don’t commit to something at the wrong moment.
The input queue is another thing that lines up with this. I believe the whole point is to, again, push the user into being careful. Dark Souls isn’t a hack and slash like DMC. You don’t want to go into fights button mashing. The game wants you to take your time. The button queue kind of reinforces that by punishing button mashing and being too hasty. I do also find it useful in queuing certain actions like attacking straight out of a roll or following item usage.
All the things you describe as clunky each have a purpose. The game expects you to work with those limitations and when you do you get a better experience. Going against them is when you run into issues. Since youre attempting to doing things the game is trying to discourage. Like button mashing (input queue) and getting too greedy with attacks (Being locked to actions/Longer animations).
It doesn’t take that much to go and find out about games like AC:Unity and Arkham Knight that predate NMS. In fact I’m pretty sure Ubisoft and EA are the two companies most notorious for “Release broken fix later” to give you a head start on looking into things.
Discourse surrounding broken game launches/Release Broken Fix Later has been around a bit longer than NMS.
Cyberpunk 2077 was a really ambitious game, with a lot of new mechanics and incredible graphics. Beasts like that are really difficult to optimize for a large range of computers with different specs, so at first it ran poorly on some.
What about all the other “Ambitious games” that we’ve had over the years that come out just fine? A game being ambitious does not excuse a company releasing the game in what is blatantly an unfinished state. This isn’t the case of a game having a few performance hiccups here and there but rather egregious bugs and severe performance issues across the board. This is stuff that is all over youtube, reddit, twitter and so on. It’s pretty well documented how bad the game was.
The most notably buggy release was the PS4 one. And rightfully so. They were trying to run a truly next gen game on a console which was more than a decade old. They not only had to optimize the game, but they basically made a completely different game, with different assets and engines, which was really difficult to do. Still, it was too much for the console, especially old PS4s that were full of dust or had old fans and were overheating.
Again, this really isn’t an excuse. They had the power the can the next gen versions of the game if it was so difficult to pull off. They also had the power to delay the game in order to make sure that it was ready for launch. They could have done so many things such that the last gen versions of the day would either never see the light of day or be ready for launch. CDPR are a big enough studio to pull something like this off. They’re not a small indie studio.
Another important fact is that users were also pressuring CDPR into releasing Cyberpunk 2077. It was delayed at least once (maybe twice, I don’t remember), and people wanted to play the game. They probably had to choose between delaying it another time or releasing it without polishing it that much.
Yes, there may have been pressure. But no, the consumer base does not have anywhere near enough power over corporations like you’re trying to imply. Games aren’t just released early because “Oh no the consumers are getting angy”. Though once again this was their fault due to them giving the consumer a completely unrealistic initial release date that they obviously could not hit, considering the absolute state of the game at launch.
The most likely explanation is that they were simply trying to get the game out as soon as possible to cash in and they absolutely did not want to miss a major sales period such as Christmas. They were simply trying to drop a minimal viable product with plans to fix it later. Turns out they dropped a less than minimally viable product in their rush to make some dosh. Knowingly too if you look into the allegations that I’ll link later.
I believe it was Cyberpunk 2077 that started the trend of “release now fix later” games.
No. “Release broken fix later” has been a thing for maybe the last decade. Do people not remember shitshows like AC:Unity? Cyberpunk is most definitely not the first game to be “Release broken, fix later”.
However, I don’t think they really did it on purpose.
I don’t think it was dropped broken on purpose. But I do think it was an attempt to drop the usual bare minimum product. Just so happens that they miscalculated and dropped something less than minimal. It’s still gross incompetence and shows the consumer they’re more than willing to drop something bare minimum with the promise of fixing it later. Rather than dropping a complete game.
The game was too ambitious for its own good, and having to develop, optimize and test two basically different versions of it was too big of a task for a studio that in today’s terms wasn’t even that big.
Again, not an excuse. They’re a massive studio, big enough to have people that know how to plan a project like this, people that understand their limitations and what is or isn’t achievable. It’s standard project planning practice.
But even then there are allegations that people in the company were aware that the game was not ready to launch.
And yet they still dropped the game.
There is no excuse for the launch of CP2077.
The rest of the AAA producers just realized that CDPR still won loads of money at launch, and decided to release incomplete games on purpose, after seeing that CDPR could make profits that way.
The industry learned this about a decade ago. We’ve been plagued by half baked launched for so long at this point that you don’t have to go far to find out about it.
But must importantly, CDPR did an amazing job at fixing the game, unlike many other studios releasing broken AAAs.
In this case I think it’s less fixing the game and more finishing the development of the game, all things considered. The thing they should have done before releasing the game as if it was a finished product when, in fact, it clearly wasn’t.
There’s fixing a game and there’s what CDPR had to do to CP2077.
Yes, a lot of companies don’t fix their games. But at the same time most of these companies don’t release their games in such a state that they start getting into legal trouble over the launch of their game.
https://www.nme.com/news/cyberpunk-2077-investigated-polish-consumer-protection-agency-2855205
Cyberpunk was such a massive disaster that they didn’t really have much choice other than to finish working on their game. To repair the massive hit to their PR as well as other issues such as the class action and the whole debacle with Sony kicking the game of the PS Store.
Even though it took a while, they still delivered the game they promised to their buyers.
Yes, it’s good that they stuck with the game and did more than the bare minimum to bring it to a better state. But it’s not exactly something to praise them over. It took them ~2 years to bring the game to a state that it should have been in at launch. Instead of launching the game in a finished state, they knowingly dropped the game in an unfinished state. They also put out a review embargo preventing reviewers from informing the consumer about said issues, they actively worked to mislead the consumer about the state of their game.
What CDPR did is absolutely not excusable under any circumstances.
Their next projects should absolutely be scrutinised until they prove that they have learned from their mistakes.
PTDE can be played above 60 through DSFix with minor physics bugs.
Remastered cant as all the logic is tied to the fps.