I get why she wasn’t super popular during EA, she’s kinda a dick early game. Once you get to the Creche though her story is badass and it changes her outlook a ton.
She’s up with Karlach as one of the best companions in the game.
Yall windows gamers be acting like the only computers people own are windows. It’s a huge pain to run a number of games on Linux. And don’t get me started on Mac support.
It’s a lot better than it used to be, from a Linux perspective. I switched to Mint a few months ago and it can be a bit fiddly, but I haven’t had any real issues with any of the games I’ve tried. Admittedly, that’s all through Steam, but still.
I think the only way that could possibly work is if all manufacturers followed the same specs. That way games can be developed for all platforms equally.
3DO tried this, and failed spectacularly. Any other way would stifle competition though, which is bad for everyone.
I’m confident there’s a way to make it work. 3D Printers operate with this model for the most part (thanks Jeff Prusa!)
Effectively, console manufacturers should agree on some kind of standard architecture, which, to be very realistic and blunt (apologies as this isn’t necessarily the tone of the post, but I like trying to make things work in some way), as long as Nintendo is in the console game, it’s gonna be a bit difficult (unless we just let them do whatever they want console-wise and have the others create some kind of standard home console arch). As someone who is dipping their toes into game development, that is something I would love to see.
Xbox One/Series S/SeriesX and PS4/5 are x86 PCs, Switch is an ARM phone.
So, in the lowest level they are pretty out of the shelf hardware. Electronics are getting way to complicated to invest in the development of custom hardware architectures for a single product.
You take a commonly used architecture, fork an Operating System that you have access to, bundle as many libraries as makes sense and call it a day. No one is going to use weird quirks of the hardware except if you make some deal with Unity or Unreal.
Certainly, I myself am on a Linux machine with a 1070Ti and a Xeon 1650 processor that’s never left it’s socket since it was placed in there in some factory. I would guess it’s somewhat rare to have a machine such as this because it was originally meant as a workstation (I can tell because the door has handles on the inside that make it an effective shield), and I would guess anyone who does have this set up will have Windows installed on it.
That being said, differences in software between Windows and Linux is slowly becoming irrelevant with the continued development of proton and the various FOSS alternatives (i.e. GIMP replacing Photoshop). For the most part, the only differences these days are certain games from certain studios that for whatever reason decided not to check a box that says “Yes, I want this to work on Linux.” This of course disregards any specialist software that was only ever developed for Windows, which I’ve read numerous examples of.
It’s a different model entirely, most copies of windows sold will never have a game installed on them bar the pack-ins. No one is buying a console to do spreadsheets.
I’m amazed everyone seems to have forgotten the open nature was an Achilles heel for the 3DO model, then it occured to me that the console is 30 years old and I’m even older lol.
The fact is that the console market works how it does, advanced tach at reasonable prices, because the platform holders make money on an ongoing basis from each user. Getting rid of that model will mean consoles selling for the same price as equivilent specced PCs at launch.
What exactly is it that prevents a PlayStation from playing an Xbox game?
A dell PC can play the same games that an Acer can.
Why can’t we have some sort of standardized console operating system like android where different companies can design their own console systems all of which can play the same games?
Oh, is it simply because of capitalist proprietary bullshit? Okay that’s fine.
That model has been tried in the past and it didn’t work because no one was making any licensing costs from the games produced to pump into R&D to progress the platform. Remember the 3D0?
The reason a PS can’t play an Xbox game is because Sony don’t have access or the legal right to implement the hardware or software environment that MS have patented for the Xbox.
The Steam Deck is a PC at the end of the day though which has always been a different model. They still lock the main OS to their store despite it being more open if you want to dig deeper.
The latest Xbox and PS consoles are basically x86 PC’s with a AMD CPU and a locked down operating system. The Xbox uses a system based on Windows 10 (games are running in separate OS containers, basically Window VMs in HyperV) and the PS is using Sony’s Orbis OS, what based upon FreeBSD.
None of which changes the fact that the console market is driven by platform holders selling consoles for low profit or even a loss and making it up on the back end with their cut of all games, accessories, etc released for the format.
Would be nice if there were some kind of open source, cross-platform, low-level graphics API, maybe overseen by some kind of pan-industry group (or “consortium” if you’re feeling fancy). Just spitballing but you could call it “Cape” or “Hephaestos” or something.
Would be great too if there were one or two open-source, MIT- or dual-licensed game engines that target this API. Maybe even some runtimes so you could target PC and the big three console platforms.
In fact it would help game development as much as “similar” approach helps the web grow the way you don’t need to reinvent the wheel every time. Although you can.
Interesting to see this particular addition. Handy for the players with slower reflexes, utterly useless for speedrunners (unless it messes up with physics somehow)
I also wonder how will achievements be managed while the accessibility turned on. Plenty of people are out there, vocally complaining about “handing out the platinum” to people “that do less effort than I did to earn it”.
Some games have separate achievements for separate difficulty levels. I can see how any approach will leave some people annoyed, though. I don’t care much about achievements (in 40 years I don’t think I’ve 100% a single game) so I don’t really have a dog in the race.
I hope so. As someone who will use the accessibility features, I don’t mind separate badges at alll. I don’t need the same badge as a speed-runner. I just want to play the game.
I’m not an achievement/trophy hunter personally but I can see some people’s issue there. The whole point of them is to indicate you’ve done something particular in game. If it’s just reaching a point in a story or whatever no big deal, but if it’s something that requires some skill, having it available when you can turn off the need for all those skills does undermine the system a bit.
I used to be one of those people who thought that it was unfair that they were handing out the achievements for “less effort,” 'til somebody pointed out to me that it isn’t for less effort. Somebody who needs accommodations would be playing a harder game than somebody who doesn’t at default settings. Their difficulty curve is steeper. Accomodations are a way of bringing the difficulty curve more in line with what a non-disabled player would experience.
And besides - most people aren’t going to want to completely ruin the game for themselves by sucking out any semblance of difficulty. Most people are still gonna play the game in a way where they get challenged. And even if they do, who cares? That doesn’t devalue the work that you did, you know? You still put in that effort yourself, so you can still feel secure in it.
Not coming after you in particular, just talking on a couple of the general points you brought up.
A single console is one of those things that sounds great on paper, but considering how scummy the industry has been lately, would be used in the most anti-consumer way possible.
A single console on the market = Monopoly. Those are never good for consumers.
Game platforms… I probably shouldn’t say this, but I wish there was only one," Yoshida said, translated by IGN. "It would be better for both the developers and the players.
I think if he meant one standard like DVD and companies like Sony or Microsoft would make the dvd player. Other companies can join in. We would have choice and competition. And the one game would work the same on any device.
Not even, you still have to consider different components and operating systems, sometimes even what versions of the OS people are running since it’s not always cross compatible.
Then who gets the licensing costs for the Dev kits? Who gets the 30% cut of the digital store? Who gets the cut of accessories sold? Each game sold? Who’s responsible for updating the OS?
The console market works how it does because they sell the tech at a loss and make up money on the ongoing sales. The 3DO tried the open source model in the early 90s and ended up with ridiculously pricey consoles as all the manufacturers needed to make their profit upfront. Eventually, there will be no price difference between a console and a PC if equivilent specs.
What a fucking clown, every time this idiot opens his mouth I cringe, he always has the worst takes imaginable. Almost makes me glad that FF16 undersold (for SE standards).
It sounds like a dumb idea, but I kind of see where he's coming from at least that it would be easier for developers. Admittedly consoles today are a lot closer in specs than they use to be, but you still have issues crop up like Larian Studios having to delay BG3 for Series X because they have to get split-screen working on Series S before it can launch. So I can see the appeal of only having to develop games on one console. But I don't really see the benefit to players, since whoever made the one console would have a monopoly on the market.
Is this a single player game? Then cool, 100%, love it. Co-op? Probably fine, but I’d have some implementation questions.
Pvp? I ate the biggest backlash I’ve had on the Internet on another forum when I argued that players shouldn’t be able to unilaterally make the game easier for just themselves in a competitive game, and I’m still mad about it.
That’s probably fine. Like if you want to play with triple iframes you can play with other people that have triple iframes (or who said they’re ok with that). I just don’t think you should be able to adjust your iframes whenever you want. Like, not in the middle of a match you’re losing.
I don’t know how to solve match making if you have a lot of those settings. Like if you can change iframes, parry frames, max health, max stamina, max incoming damage, min outgoing damage, and so on, that’s an explosive set of variables. You’d be lucky to find someone with your exact settings. Which is maybe fine? Maybe most people would use the defaults.
But the last time I had this conversation, some guy was adamant he should be able to play with me even if he has his settings tweaked to be nigh indestructible.
When did games go from being something fun to do, to people getting so serious about them that they would rather fuck over a bunch of disabled people than lose a game?
Whenever I play competitive games I see people raging in the comments like every game, and it's usually people who aren't doing very good that round because they want to blame everyone else for losing. Idk why y'all are paying $60+ just to be angry the entire time. Fuck around and have fun, it's not that serious.
It's so bad you're STILL mad about a hypothetical situation that doesn't even exist. Spiderman 2 is single player. If it was competitive, and disabled people being able to play ruins your life sooo much, then don't play it. Crisis averted.
Yes, I do get upset when people act like disabled people needing accommodations is ruining their life. For obvious reasons. Disabled people had no accommodations in games for literal decades and suddenly able bodied people act like it's the end of the world when they start getting introduced. The difference is that some disabled people literally cannot play when you have a choice. And ranting, on multiple forums, about how accommodations will ruin your hypothetical competitive game that doesn't even exist yet!
And games are not the only scenario, I see a similar attitude in every instance where disabled people are granted accomodations.
You want accomodations to not exist in certain scenarios. Your comment was clear.
You’re not engaging with what I’m actually saying. I’m not saying accomodations are ruining my life.
It feels to me like what you’re saying is that “Accommodations” has an unbound scope. Anything and everything can be changed in the name of accommodations. Double your health in street fighter? Fine. See the other players hands in Poker. Sure. Turn on slow-mo in Quake9? Well okay.
And any of those things might be fine and fun if everyone playing agrees. Maybe you’re new at poker and I want to show one of my cards as a boost to you, the rookie. But for you to walk into a game and be like “yo I need to see your cards to play” seems egregious.
Maybe that’s not what you meant.
Maybe for you this is a “for me it was Tuesday.” You’ve possibly spent your whole life arguing with assholes like me who can just take their presumably abled asses and just walk away when it’s no longer interesting to them. I’m sorry for your struggles and injustices. You don’t really owe me anything.
I'm not sure what you're on about but he wasn't complaining about Spider-Man 2. He even said if a game is 1P, then he's fine with any settings a player wants.
His complaint was about competitive games and I think it's a fair complaint (albeit a bit off topic) I don't think it's in your (or anyone else's) purview to tell others what games are or aren't about nor how seriously they should take their games.
We have entire competitive (and, imo, friendly) communities centered around competition and the notion that the rules are the same for everyone.
You could give bullet time to one player while the other moves and controls slowly. Or you could give one player bigger iframes to sort of approximate it.
Like, for one player they’re invulnerable for a full two seconds after pushing dodge, but the other player is only invulnerable for a quarter second.
Lots of ways to try
But as someone else in this thread said, this was kind of me going off topic. Slightly related but not exactly what the article was about.
Don’t make me point to the sign with people standing on boxes in front of a fence.
This should be very easily solved with matchmaking lobby settings.
Anyway, most accessibility settings are either something every competitive player should be using anyway (reasonable color contrast settings, HUD tweaks for clarity) or things that only people who need them despately would ever use (remapping all buttons to be able to play using only a stick in the players mouth, because they have no hands).
This seems to me like a total non-issue. And in the very few cases it is, the ranked lobbies can just diable that setting.
The backlash was probably because for you and I a harmed pvp experience is a “could happen” while for a bunch of gamers the lack of accessibility is a daily undeniable part of their reality. For some people, games are a critical sanity-saving retreat from the rest of their life. Let’s let them have their tweaks outside of ranked play.
I don’t have problems with control changes, subtitles, HUD stuff, all the things that are typically considered accessibility. I reject the idea that any arbitrary piece of a multiplayer game can be unilaterally changed in the name of accessibility. Which is maybe not a take any reasonable person has., but it’s one I’ve encountered.
But your last paragraph is probably right in that for them it was an emotionally charged “every day I deal with this bullshit” and I was coming off as “yeah but like what if i’m mildly inconvenienced one day?”.
Two things i love about accessibility. First more people get to play the games. and second it usually lets you turn off those stupid ass mini puzzles and quicktime events developers love so much for some reason.
Yea I’ll admit I used the skip puzzle mini games thing in the last game. I did a few of the first puzzles, determined I didn’t like them, and turned on the skip feature
I liked them fine enough the first time through the game. But I absolutely loved that I could disable them for my second playthrough. More customization like this is a big step forward.
I played through Spider-Man 1 with the puzzles enabled for a few hours before turning that crap off. I’m very glad they gave the option to do so because they are annoying and tedious at best and downright frustrating at worst. They absolutely grenade the pacing and flow of the gameplay. There are numerous puzzle games out there I could play if I wanted puzzles; I don’t want half-assed, janky, pace-destroying puzzles in my action games.
I agree with your last statement, but I actually really enjoyed the puzzles in Spider-Man 1. The story-based ones were never difficult, and for the optional ones, I just waited until I was in the mood for some puzzles, and then blew through them all in one go.
But if you don’t like puzzles at all, I understand turning them off.
I also love when it lets you emphasize the parts of the game you enjoy, so you can e.g. make exploration challenging and combat trivial if that's your jam.
ign.com
Active