viktorcode

@elvisfan1 You'll have to make screenshots and then later compare them pixel by pixel to see those increased details. Or, you just an eagle-eyed person with somewhat high tolerance for frame jitter.

Hahahahaha no. I'll stick with 60 FPS, thankyouverymuch. This is the new gen experience, not the amount of details at 30 FPS with useless native 4k.

P.S. YouTube compression is the worst among major video hosting services. It is also the only major video hosting which does not support HEVC compression, which is de facto standard for hardware support.

I guess that was a part of Activision / Blizzard deal: we publish wherever we want.

@awp69 I understand that some developers may want to unlock higher frame rates due to VRR, but personally I think that's a very bad choice for following reasons:

1. Games are designed around frame budget. Say, you want 60 FPS, so you know exactly how much time in milliseconds you have for rendering, simulation, physics. You can manage it, more or less, for every frame. That's how locked frame rate is achieved. And now some manager comes up and says "screw that, let's remove the cap". And frame time starts swinging all other the place. It is a bad experience for the player, not having the predictable pace, even when it's masked with VRR. It might be good, eventually, when your FPS never dips below 120. But we are far from achieving this.

2. Many players won't have VRR for many years due to TV. For them stable frame rate is necessity. And that's why game developers worth their salt carefully managing frame budget, instead of relying on technology to mask their poor work.

@IonMagi I guess the reason is the same as why PlayStation 4 got HDR support much later in its lifetime: it takes time to implement, and higher priority features get worked on first.

@IonMagi PS5 HDMI bandwidth is limited programatically. And VRR doesn't require more bandwidth.

@awp69 VRR does not make games run faster. What it does, is improving average FPS value, which I consider a misleading metric. The precise metric should be the time to render a frame, and it should have max value to indicate how far console is falling behind the expected result.

When a console isn't able to render a frame in an allowed tome slot, the next frame will be delayed. And that's where VRR comes into play. Without VRR the next frame will be delayed for a set period of time, even if it is ready before that. With VRR the next frame will be rendered almost without a delay, thus making frame drops less visible. Average FPS goes up due to less waiting, but the actual time to render frames never changes. If your console struggles, it keeps struggling.

Could they be doing just what Apple does: having more than one supplier of the same technology at the same time?

@BoldAndBrash Exactly right. In years when I was playing first Destiny, I skipped all the other games.

How the spell casting mechanics work? Is it you spend more time on a spell - spell does more damage kind of thing? Is there some sort of mana?

For me that's the thing that will make or break this game

Going to wait for reviews. Price is secondary.

@Kang81 Exactly. Destiny stopped being good the moment Bungie decided to go Eververse and Seasons route, instead of just selling content in form of DLCs.

@OneWingedAngel It's dropped from 160k avg concurrent Steam players initially to 50k now. Yes, it is popular, but it's an old game that will keep losing players. DLCs effects on reversing the trend are only temporary.

Maybe will start caring about Destiny when Luke Smith (current game director) is fired from his position.

The one thing Sony should learn from Bungie is "how to NOT ruin your game and loose goodwill of your player base". I highly doubt people who knew how to make a new game that will hold players' interest for a long time still work in that studio.

@BadPlayerOne Their best year as independent, which is worse than what they had under Activision. I'm basing that solely on player number, which can be inferred from Steam charts. Also, from Activision quarterly reports it can be seen that the financial peak was reached at the start of Destiny 2 sales. Year after that Activision became "disappointed" in the results and decided to dump them. I cannot frame this story as any kind of success.

@BadPlayerOne They went free to play. You can see on Steam charts how their PC popularity declined from the initial peak.

This is overpriced. Especially with headcount like that. Bungie in 2014 and Bungie now are two very different studios. It is impossible to ignore severe game quality degradation that went before our eyes. Bungie of old invented game mechanics, genres, and built worlds. Bungie of today is a clueless upper management, trying to shove what was created before them into a free to play grindest, while proudly wearing old developer badge.

For me it is the worst studio purchase by Sony.

I have the rule to not get freebies that I wouldn't otherwise play, be it because of quality or genre. As the result in the last half year or so I got only a couple of games from PlayStation+. So, February is just month as usual, continuing the low point of catalogue.

I will wait for patches. I just know I must. And then I'll play.

I read the subtitle as "mandatory movie ticket"

GamePass on PlayStation will be profitable for Sony. I hope we all understand that whatever game subscription service is there, it has to pay the cut to the platform owner.

Remember how even Fortnite pays its share of revenue to Sony for micro-transactions conducted outside of PlayStation (depending on what platform the spender plays the most).

Answered "continue doing what they are doing" but I think they should slightly adjust overall strategy. Namely, pay more attention to their console store and maybe open a PC store, if they are set to release significant number of games there. Making their console more welcoming to indies wouldn't hurt.

@Rural-Bandit There's a difference: Apple and Google own the stores but not the game studios. The closest to game making they are is investment in form of Apple Arcade and Google Stadia.

@Integrity That reliable profitability of a publisher evaporates at the moment when the new owners start dictating which platforms they may publish on (no PlayStation) and which subscription scheme they must participate in (GamePass).

We can only guess at the moment what Microsoft is planning to do with their recent purchase.

An international investor potentially could swallow up EA. Softbank, Embracer Group — those guys. Or even Disney. If Microsoft tries to it will be the cause for government intervention. If Tencent tries, it still may be blocked due to the optics of Chinese buying american assets.

Everyone else simply don't have money or desire.

@Integrity I mostly agree with you, except the part about the effect of the deal on other industry players.

Google is done buying game studios. Stadia was enough gaming for them, and now they want to sell it as a service to other businesses, rather than players.
Apple won't start buying game publishers. There's no point; they own the biggest game store on the planet in terms of revenue, and are also paying developers directly for presence on Arcade.
Even Amazon at this point had enough of buying studios. Year after year of failed projects will do that.

After all, game development is a high-risk business. Especially comparing to running online game store.

Apple and Google are the two companies that keep the gates to the largest game market of them all: mobile. Microsoft is obviously envious. Probably they dropped their mobile ambitions after understanding that they've lost the momentum necessary to dominate this market.

@Rmg0731 Tencent don't dictate its studios and publishers how to do business. Tencent trusts them to grow with the help of investment.
Disclosure: worked for a company that got investment from Tencent, about 10% os shares.

For those who believe that cloud gaming is popular and Microsoft is going to reach everyone on every piece of hardware through GamePass cloud subscription, here's some analysis:

In 2021 whole cloud gaming market is estimated to have generated $1.5B revenue.
In 5 years time this number is projected to reach $3-6B by various estimates.
In 10 years time it is projected to grow further, but is still expected to lag existing platforms.

In short, cloud streaming will earn less money than native port. This trend is expected to continue for at least 10 years.

@dasd2 They had to say something for investors to hear. I don't think they are very worried though. Sony Entertainment is not a company whose survival depends on market domination. They still be around even with a smaller market share.

Why you all have decided that that CoD is leaving PlayStation? Microsoft is not going to recoup $70Bn by leaving the most profitable store for the franchise just to spite a competitor.

@Alduin Yeah, I can imagine Microsoft not wanting to dominate a billions making industry because a competitor decided to NOT make timed exclusives. It is sooooo relevant.

@TommyNL Pfft... Apple may just open Japanese subsidiary for the merger. Most likely they already have one.

@Col_McCafferty There's no point buying Xbox if you have a PC. Microsoft will continue releasing games on Windows. That alone undermines purchasing Xbox.

@get2sammyb
" there’s no acquisition that the Japanese giant could feasibly make to fill the void of one of the biggest brands on its platform"

Apple buys Sony. Boom. All of a sudden there's lot of money and access to bleeding edge hardware teams. PlayStation incorporates Apple Arcade and other services into PS+, and that alone can't be matched by Microsoft.

@naruball It is a process of monopolisation, where the end point (after many acquisitions) is a monopoly. That reduces competition.

And if you don't have competition then you already have a monopoly in this market, by definition.

I don't think they will make all of Activision-Blizzard exclusive. $70 Bn is hard to recoup.

@naruball But monopoly is anti-competition.

@Deadlyblack So far Nintendo only experimented with mobile market. I can't see why they are going to port anything to different console though. After all, Sony does not port their games to Xbox

@Radekbejbl1 How much patience do I need to wait for Bloodborn port? When it's coming to PC?

@lolwhatno You are totally right. For indies getting on Steam isn't a matter of preference; it's business necessity.

@Juanalf Hardcore PC crowd is a minority of PC sales. it is good to appeal them as they are very active online, but game developers know, they aren't those who their game should be directed to

@nessisonett Can't imagine a game developer voluntarily avoiding the biggest money generating platform outside of mobile

@dasd2 I think this will happen at the advent of PlayStation 6. So far it is a brilliant advertising campaign to bring new players to the platform. In this case, to play Ragnarok.

For people who struggle:
1. Turn on always sprint in settings. Just do it.
2. Try different weapons. They all become tremendously good as you permanently unlock new perks.

@Ashkorsair There's a simple trick to finding glyphs and logs: complete a biome, if you still have something to find there - restart the cycle from the menu (not dying). Followed this tip and it worked for me.

@nessisonett That's no the plot. The plot tells you answers to the questions you don't yet know, because they will be presented at the end of act 2 in cinematic.

@WallyWest Not really a miracle; it's just developer studios haven't had enough experience on using raytracing efficiently yet. Low resolution raytracing for global illumination works wonders in Metro Exodus. I expect more of this kind in future games.

If raytracing is used solely for reflections, it can be safely ignored. 60 FPS mode of course is the only one playable in highly dynamic games.