I think of that every time I see a cursor following my mouse in an FPS game.
And at the moment, I struggle to remember anything besides the tiny resemblance of that in Cyberpunk 2077 lol
I think of that every time I see a cursor following my mouse in an FPS game.
And at the moment, I struggle to remember anything besides the tiny resemblance of that in Cyberpunk 2077 lol
Can anyone explain to me, a dumbass, what it means for my current save file? I haven't beaten the main quest yet because I've been doing everything else for over 120 hours (finally got all the gigs and NCPD scanners, at least), but I still don't see how an overhaul of that caliber is going to play well with the current balance of things. Judging by that one update that reset my skill and perk points, I think we can expect some resets again.
I think Phantom Liberty is my incentive to finally finish the game and then start a completely new playthrough, preferably with a consistent build and playstyle this time from start to finish. So much to choose from!
Same engine doesn't necessarily meant the same problems. Game engines aren't a monolith solution - Source, for example, the engine that used to be famous for its physics back in the day, uses another engine to handle said physics.
So, the fact that Starfield is going to use the same engine (I don't know if it does, actually, I don't care) is not a reason to panic or be upset. For all we know, they may have updated many of its components in one way or another, including swapping some for better alternatives.
Having seen the entire Starfield Direct, I honestly do believe it's an upgraded version of the engine - it really looks like it doesn't behave in the same way. And, well, the new tech the devs can leverage allows them to work on some older engine limitations as well, resulting in a smoother experience overall, especially knowing what they were going for in this game.
Completely agree. At first, I though that the Reddit's voting system is great, as it aims to be somewhat similar to the approach Stack Overflow has taken, with actually helpful answers ending up at the top... which does not apply to what Reddit is, which is a forum, which is a bunch of people sharing opinions most of the time, and voting on that has never been a great idea.
Hitting an upvote or a downvote is a very basic type of engagement, a way of expressing something without having to say anything. And it's not doing much good to a forum-like platform. I've been trying to find places that don't have any vote systems, akin to the old-school forums, but I wasn't able to find anything that fit my taste or activity preferences (feel free to point to some if you know any).
You don't have to sign up for every instance you want to.
I can see that you're currently signed in to your lemmy.ml instance, for example, and if you go there and search for a community in another instance, like gaming@beehaw.org, you'll be able to view and interact with that community without ever leaving your instance.
So it is already linked in a way. Go ahead and try it out with some communities you've seen in other instances.
I think this kind of politics has been doing pretty alright before Twitter as well. They may have been lucky to have an entire platform dedicated to them in some way, but all it's done is gather all the populists in one place to happily form echo chambers. It's what Facebook has been for years, too.
We're probably more aware of it than we used to be when this style was more spread out, but this bullshit has been doing well before, is doing well, and will do well with or without Twitter or any platform that forces short, clear-cut messages. People like this shit - this is the prime reason that counties living under dictatorship often have people praising their leaders for being "strong and effective", i.e. if it sounds good, it must be good, with little firrheer analysis taking place; stickijg the the dictatorships example, you'll often see the opposition followers falling very well for the same kind of populist talk or doing away with the past and punishing the dictator and their enablers.
As a builder, would you say there's a somewhat budget pre-built option that's decent that lazy and curious people like me can look at?
I'm not having a lot of trouble with my body with the regular keyboards, but they do force.me into specific positions when I have to do actual work, because I need both sides of it rather than just the gaming one when I play.
1080 here. I'm really happy with the decision I made years back. Some games are terribly not optimized, but that won't make me cash out for a new piece of hardware.
And anything that's actually worth upgrading from my GPU is going to be even bigger and block the front panel pins on my new motherboard I was gifted last year. Yep.
Skyrim is probably one of those games you either can't put down or can't start. No in-betweens.
Holy shit, I thought I was alone in the big gaming world!
The reason I never played it is because at the time the game was out, my PC couldn't handle it, so I gave up after my sad attempts to sit through the unplayable frames. And by the time I upgraded, there were simply too many games to steal my attention entirely - that's how it been ever since.
I want to play it, though. I never considered it boring - I liked it even when I wasn't that interested in fantasy, and now I'm gravitating even more towards it. Hope to get my hands down to it one day, but with Starfield (hopefully) coming out this year, and with The Outer Worlds to beat before that happens, I think I'm not slaying any dragons any time soon.
"We're right, you're wrong, cope and cry about, thanks for coming" type of AMA incoming, along with the fan favorite nothing burger with lame ass excuses on the side
Typical Crimson Fleet geezer right here.
I'm on the same page as you are, though.
@dear_faye@halubilo.social you should probably do the same if the price tag is too much for you. If you really do feel wrong about it, you could first get the game, keep playing it all you want, and then just pay later; or, if the experience turns out to be disappointing, never pay for it as a result.
Either is better than pre-ordering. Even if Starfield is worth every penny on launch, i.e. no bugs, no issues that cannot justify the price tag, not a single argument against the very practice of pre-ordering games, giving companies money before they deliver anything at all is giving them much more than just the money - it's giving them an idea that it's okay to ask for money before any of the paying customers ever get anything, and this kind of appeasement has to stop.