NekuSoul

Kind of.

The big thing that actually defines FSR2 is that it has access to a bunch more data, particularly the depth buffer, motion vectors, and also, as you said, uses data from previous frames.

The camera jiggle is mostly just to avoid shimmering when the camera is stationary.

That’s always been their plan, but it’s getting hit with Valve Time. My guess is that they won’t do it until all issues the major with NVIDIA GPUs have been fixed, as a public build that doesn’t run properly on a majority of machines wouldn’t go well. The latest driver is pretty good, but the Big Picture mode is still pretty much unusable.

At the very least they’re currently trying to bring official support over to other handhelds, as they’ve already confirmed that they want to official support for the ROG Ally and pushed out a update to SteamOS for the controller support.

That, and monitor/TV size increased a lot at the time when flat panels became a thing, so you need a higher resolution just to achieve the same pixel density you already had on a smaller screen.

That’s assuming people actually use a parser and don’t build their own “parser” to read values manually.

And before anyone asks: Yes, I’ve known people who did exactly that and to this day I’m still traumatized by that discovery.

But yes, comments would’ve been nice.

On one hand I agree, on the other hand I just know that some people would immediately abuse it and put relevant data into comments.

As much as I’d like to see this game preserved, I don’t think the dev can be held responsible when they’re refunding everyone who purchased the game.

Yes, you’re just explaining regular piracy here. I do not care. It’s a thing that’s already been possible for almost every single-player game in existence, and yet, there’s a constant stream of new single-player games releasing every day. Weird, right?

At least try to make an effort to understand what I write.

I said it’s their job to figure out how to do DRM -if- they want DRM. If they can’t figure out how to do that then the answer shouldn’t need to be spelled out explicitly: No DRM. Simple as that.

If you’d rather see games you spent money on being taken away from you based on the whims of corporations, just to make sure others who might not have payed for it also can’t play it, then I don’t know what to tell you.

If they want to keep some form of DRM then that’s not my job to figure out. This wasn’t a problem back in the day when server software being distributed was the norm, so it shouldn’t be a problem now.

Though personally I’d be in favor of abolishing online DRM entirely, but that’s another story.

If they can play against bots, which already exist in the game, or band enough people together with access to the game to play on a server one player is able to host, then yes. That’s what I’d expect at a minimum.

nobody paid

That’s just blatantly false. People bought the founders pack were never refunded for example. Those people being entitled to the server software or a refund is anything but greedy, even if that only applies to a single person.

The other answer from @ampseandrew@lemmy.world already covers most points, so I’ll just a few things:

• Most game servers out there are already built in a way to allow for easy deployment. After all, devs have to have way to test changes, so being able to run a small server locally for debugging purposes is hugely beneficial to development.
• I also can’t imagine that there’s any game server out there that shouldn’t be able to run on a single system. The heaviest one game I can imagine is Minecraft, due to the whole open world terrain generation, world streaming and physics calculations, and even that can be run off a Raspberry Pi for a small number of players.

If a game asks for money in any kind of way: Yes. That should be the cost of (trying to do) business.
Alternatively, a full refund for everyone involved, even Kickstarter backers, would also be acceptable.

Hello, sole arbiter of a game’s worth.

Of course not every game is a certified banger, but there’s more than enough notable games on that list that made an impact on the industry and should’ve been preserved for that fact alone.

Taking away a game you bought because the game was intentionally made to rely on a server is always scummy behavior. That’s the whole point.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Category:Unplayable_games

And that’s only PC games.

“A single company does this and while the other 99 won’t, saying pretty please will certainly work. See? No intervention required!”

Bootlicker indeed.

That’s one thing I checked first, but compared to Germany for example, the average age and percentage of people playing video-games is apparently just a few percentage points of difference. Though “people playing video-games” could of course mean anything and I’d wager that the average person playing casual games on their phone might not care as much.

At this point I’d that say getting enough individual countries is almost inevitable in the process of getting 1M signatures. If the distribution between countries remains as it is, every country with more than 25% right now would reach the threshold by the end.

Seems to me like the individual country threshold is only added to prevent initiatives getting single-handedly pushed by a single big country and never be the blocker for regular initiatives.

So yeah, the best strategy would most likely be to keep pushing the big countries: Germany, France, Spain and Italy. Speaking of Italy, what’s up with them? Only 18%? Those are rookie numbers.

Looking at this map there seems to be at least some correlation. There really needs to be popular advocates for each language and country, particularly for the smaller ones and those with a low english speaking population.