£250 for a next gen console is amazing. I know on a tech site everyone is looking at the X, but for most people an S is really all you need, and it's a significantly smaller box so will fit better in most living/bedrooms. Just add a game pass and you have the perfect next gen console Christmas present for reasonable money.
I've been recently trying to play Far Cry 3 on Windows 10, and it crashes constantly and always at the end of a mission to maximise the amount of progress lost. I can see *exactly* why so many people use consoles.Originally Posted by Tunnah
This isn't the first time I have had this, it seems that you have to play a game in the first year or two it is out, or you hit compatibility issues in Windows. The whole promise of backwards compatibility of Windows is an outright fib, I've re-purchased games on GOG before in the hope they have sorted out these issues making the idea of long term game ownership a joke.
As for the PS3, I bought one when they dropped to the £200 mark as a blue ray player in a package that came with the media remote control and 5 films. That worked out very nicely.
Seems my estimate of the size was way off going by some Twitter linked on the AT forums
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1303745295382126594
via
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads.../post-40277471
If it is only 190mm² a AM4 version with DDR4 controller should theoretically be possible.
Guess for most PC usage more CPU cache is probably better than the 22CU GPU though.
That is only 40MM2 more than Renoir!Seems my estimate of the size was way off going by some Twitter linked on the AT forums
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1303745295382126594
via
https://forums.anandtech.com/threads.../post-40277471
If it is only 190mm² a AM4 version with DDR4 controller should theoretically be possible.
Guess for most PC usage more CPU cache is probably better than the 22CU GPU though.
Really?
I didn't say all, but unfortunately yes.
They all rush out poor, buggy games (often rehashes) and only care about selling passes, skins and other very low quality (and especially low time consuming) items at extortionate prices.
They have psychologists employed or contracted, to best advise how they can manipulate children for maximum profit (and they ALL market to children, when they should not).
The industry wants to be Hollywood and they're more than happy to break the same legislation and cut the same corners to get there (they are close).
Sony have been forced to bring games accross to PC too though, I expect going forward they'll have limited time exclusivity on Playstation, before being released on PC.
To quote myself from yesterdays Xbox series S reveal article - called it correctly:
As a dev (not a game dev mind) I'm going to disagree with you there. Companies always want more faster. As a dev you either meet a deadline or you don't - if you want to meet a tight deadline (like the games industry likes) then quality is what suffers. Some industries priortise code quality and give you time to do the job better. We're doing what we're told too by our bosses on the main so blame the company not the worker.
well it killed all my hype with the EA partnership...
The programmers are not lazy - its the companies themselves with overwork and underpay them,and have too much "crunch time".
Rockstar did that with RDR2.. I hope they paid their staff some good bonuses considering the money it made.
I think we're just waiting now for Sony to undercut the X by £20 - £50(at the most) now, though I wouldn't be surprised if they just matched the PS5 with Blu ray with the Series X and just see what happens sales wise. They'll probably sell out even with a price match.
It isn't about lazy. You can be the hardest working incompetent ever, just means you are writing bugs at a fierce rate
But I think you only have to look at how a lot of these companies treat their customers like cattle. They are going to be treating their own employees as badly, they are all human and should be shown some respect after all.
It often staggers me how many companies treat their engineers as unskilled second class fungible cogs, not the creators of the products that drive their wealth. Top notch programmers can get work elsewhere, so they will.
The complexity of games nowadays is just staggering. There are so many millions upon millions of ways all the different things interact with each other, which breeds grounds for bugs. It's not fair to call it incompetence (I know you're not directly saying that), the rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish that they have to cover it's practically a necessity to allow the wide release to be used as the proper QAIt isn't about lazy. You can be the hardest working incompetent ever, just means you are writing bugs at a fierce rate
But I think you only have to look at how a lot of these companies treat their customers like cattle. They are going to be treating their own employees as badly, they are all human and should be shown some respect after all.
It often staggers me how many companies treat their engineers as unskilled second class fungible cogs, not the creators of the products that drive their wealth. Top notch programmers can get work elsewhere, so they will.
That's been Bethesda's modi operandi for decades.
Release half-finished stuff, let the community fix it.
Their real name should be either Bugsoft or Betasoft.
The complexity of many software systems is staggering, and I'm sure I have worked on code that is magnitudes more complex to the point it is impossible for any one person to fully understand all of it.
My point was that from all I have heard the culture of many games companies is bad to the point that it will deter the best programmers. I know an excellent QA engineer who lasted a week at a big games company, which answers the frequent question "Didn't they test this?", to which the answer is clearly "yes, but to a standard that gets a good QA running for the door as fast as possible"
I think the disparity can be chalked up to the cost of the mistake - you build buggy software that someone uses in their business, you could cost em money and ruin your rep. You put out a buggy game there's no fiduciary downside..which in a way I guess is our fault too. If we held game QA to a higher standard and threatened sales maybe they'd put more effort in. Then again I'd never do that. Bugs are a minor annoyance in what are a major part of my entertainment. I'd rather have a buggy game now than a perfect one next year.The complexity of many software systems is staggering, and I'm sure I have worked on code that is magnitudes more complex to the point it is impossible for any one person to fully understand all of it.
My point was that from all I have heard the culture of many games companies is bad to the point that it will deter the best programmers. I know an excellent QA engineer who lasted a week at a big games company, which answers the frequent question "Didn't they test this?", to which the answer is clearly "yes, but to a standard that gets a good QA running for the door as fast as possible"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
