Das_Regal

Neat, the 5 people who have VRR TVs are gonna love this.

 

(Joking mostly)

 

How many of you actually have a VRR TV though? I don't have a sense of how far behind the times I am technologically. I have a 4k Monitor I use that has a cap of 60 FPS and I feel like I'm unusual among my friends/family who are all using sub 1080 resolution models.

That's the problem. Sony didn't think that backwards compatibility was worth it financially. If they did, they would have done it.

 

Xbox had an entire team dedicated to working full time on backwards compatibility for an entire generation. That cost time and money.

 

With what RPCS3 was able to accomplish in their spare time imagine what a dedicated team of Sony employees aided by Mark Cerny could have accomplished if they wanted?  Look at the graphical difference between Uncharted 1 vs The Last of Us? The hardware did not change, that improvement came simply from better understanding of the hardware. 

I don't disagree that it's a technical hurdle that is capable of being overcome, but it is definitely more of a technical hurdle than xbox 360 was for backpat. You're just wrong about that. The 360 uses a development paradigm that is very similar to making PC games. The PS3 does not. It fundamentally required a different set of programming skills to do well that doesn't translate to x86 very well. That difference is why Sony hasn't pursued it. I still think they should--we actually agree. But you're just factually wrong about some things.

 

RPCS3 sucks, even now. And if you haven't used it, you don't know how much of a pain in the ass it is. Trust me, RPCS3 is *really* not at all user friendly and has a lot of problems, because it's attempting to solve a very difficult problem.

The PS3 is a lot more complicated than "just the IBM power PC" architecture. To develop well for it you need to know how to design your software to take advantage of the cell processor's oddities. I don't want to get bogged down in the technical details, but basically it's really hard and requires you to think about programming in a very different way. This is why RPCS3 isn't that great. It still can't run Metal Gear Solid 4 effectively after like 5+ years of development. I have tried everything and it's a nightmare.

As for Game Pass, their goal is simple: fund it until solvent. It is a sustainable model because they have long-range plans, exactly how Amazon became popular. Low barrier for entry, excellent value, and stakeholders that understand the goal is to craft a new core service model. They're thinking 10 years from now which is going to gain them more than just a gaming division.

The way it works is this: corporations suffer massive losses as they move into a new market and only tell their shareholders how much marketshare they've gained (aka subscribers numbers--the only thing we know about gamepass, and massively distorted by free trials and $1 renewals). They get investment from the stock market which helps them continue to fund the expansion even though they're losing money technically in that division. Investors bet on them because of the hope of future profitability. Eventually people become so attached to the service that they can't imagine living without it. That's when they raise the prices and the goodwill dies, but it doesn't matter because they don't need it--just money.

 

Sony is doing this now because they won last generation. Microsoft did it last generation because they won before that, Etc.

I think Sony is being greedy and doesn't want to do parity with Microsoft. As the market leaders, Sony feels like like people will buy their games regardless.

Sony has stated in the past they don't think Microsoft's model is sustainable. And to be clear--we don't know that it is. We have no idea how much money they're pumping into Game Pass at the moment. And if you think Game Pass is going to remain the deal it is currently forever, you're just flat out wrong. They've already slowed down the rate at which they add high value titles, and that's not going to change. They can't keep buying studios forever. At some point, they are going to hike the price massively.

 

This is how businesses work--good deals to acquire customers, then once they have you in the door they crank up the prices and profit.

 

Sony wants to compete shortterm, not follow Microsoft off of the profit-losing cliff long-term.

Quick Elden Ring thoughts...

 

1) Can't believe how good it looks. Demon's Souls PS5 is probably technically prettier in static shots, but the animations in this are so much better.

2) Such a big game. My mind is blown.

3) Combat feels great and much deeper this time around.

4) I love the progression curve, it's pretty great.

5) The mount is actually amazing.

 

It doesn't feel like anything I've ever played before overall.

Dying Light 2 short review: it's a sequel to Dying Light. I imagine it'll be just as good in a few years. Technically it's very similar to the state that Cyberpunk 2077 was in after they fixed its PS5 crashing. I.E. bugs exist that sometimes ruin story sequences with absurdity but ultimately it's playable. I think there's more to 2077 though--the world is bigger and it was certainly more stylish. Both have pretty underwhelming RPG mechanics that really need a lot more depth.

Call of Duty will remain multiplatform even after existing agreement. I think all these big multiplayer games or Gaas will be multiplatform. Too much money to be made.
https://blogs.micros...ision-blizzard/

This doesn't say what people think it does. The exact quote:

 

And we have committed to Sony that we will also make them available on PlayStation beyond the existing agreement and into the future so that Sony fans can continue to enjoy the games they love.

This could mean any number of things, but it is not a promise that every Call of Duty game going forward will be released on Sony platforms. It can be read that way, but if they wanted to say that they probably would've said that!

 

They could mean that they aren't removing the back catalogue from Sony's platforms or any other number of things. This is company speak, not a promise that they aren't going to take content away from Sony and generally speaking first party studios don't buy developers only to have them keep releasing titles on their competitors. Could Microsoft buck the trend? Yes. Will they? Maybe, maybe not. But this is not a promise that they're going to.

Time for my old man complaint of the day.

 

I want to buy a PSN cards so I can preorder Elden Ring. Amazon works fine--PSN makes me log in again. It's pain, but whatever. I can't log into gamestop. Spend 15 minutes trying things that don't work. Ok. I'll download their app. Able to download their app and complete the transaction... Now they're taking forever to give me the damn code. Still haven't got it, but I may as well prep for when I do. Go back to PSN to click redeem. Oh, it wants me to log in AGAIN. It's been a few hours!

 

Why does the new PS Store require you to enter your password EVERY TIME you just want to redeem credit?! Is Sony afraid someone is gonna get on my PC and give me free money?

The difference with the Yakuza games is that while they had really long cut scenes they kept the plot moving and did not often repeat themselves. In the second half of Arise they would often over explain things and then another character would repeat pretty much exactly what was just said moments prior. Toss on a few skits to recap what was just covered and boom, plot point sufficiently beat into your head. There were numerous times where I started skipping dialog, audibly saying "I get it already, we just covered this" and fast forwarding through skits.

That would an issue for me from the very beginning honestly. No subtlety, they overexplain everything. It's something I notice often in JRPGs. I'm guessing it's a localization thing, but I don't know.

 

FFXIV does it too.

For some reason

I don't know what could be the cause. Wonder what's going on right now.

I just got a PS5 and I'm very confused on how to access the current downloads screen. It's probably right in plain sight, but I can't seem to find it. Anyone point me in the right direction?

Tap the PS button; it's in the quick menu that comes up when you do.

If they were remakes with some more modern game design I would be all over the GTA re-releases, but remasters? C'mon. Slightly better textures and models with a few minor tweaks can't save three games from before 2005. The only thing GTA 3's design still has going for it is its soundtrack.

 

https://youtu.be/jju...nLdapLAGvNGWIKC

 

This is just an attempt to remonetize their back catalogue to make up for holes in the release pipeline.

Elections are people buying Battlefield because they don't want Call of Duty.

People are just idiots. Think of the intelligence Bell Curve and the Zipf-Mandelbrot law, and realize that a good majority of people are dumbasses who do very little thinking.

it probably has more to do with the age of the voters than anything. The chart is full of recency bias. Tons of revolutionary titles ranked out by good, but people won’t remember them in 30 years games.

Mario 64 lost to Arkham. Super Metroid to Apex Legends.

Basically these people would think Avatar is better than Citizen Kane.