Jump to content

PCGamingWiki will soon migrate to a Single Sign On (SSO) system to bridge Wiki and Forum accounts, please read our FAQ.

Mirh

Moderator
  • Content Count

    852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    46

Posts posted by Mirh


  1. 144-1572738134-2056171328.png

    While everybody is hanging on a mysterious tweet by Bioware (which depending on the mood, is each month working on a new remaster/remake of one of their games), PC gamers already have everything that is needed for a full 4K 999Hz 21:9 VR experience. Seriously. We only miss HDR /s

    More about this courtesy of Eurogamer.

    Quote

    "Stand by for clearance Normandy," bellows Captain David Anderson as the iconic ship approaches Citadel Dock 422. Shortly thereafter the wonder of the galaxy's epicentre hits you like a sledgehammer, its empyrean skyline a majestic marvel among the cosmos. However, there exists a monumental issue that has plagued this cutscene for over a decade: it has aged like a fine wine, if only said wine had its cork removed long before it was shelved.

    Fortunately, there is a fix. After the divisive denouement of Mass Effect 3 ripped a fissure in the community, a group of fans banded together to rewrite the series' disgruntling culmination. Thus the Mass Effect modding community was born, brewed from a chaotically potent cocktail of discontent and desire for more. "We only have Mass Effect 3 mods because of the terrible endings," Spectre Expansion Mod author Tydeous tells me in a recent interview. "People hated them with such passion that it spawned an entire community that wanted to fix them."

    Although the ensuing ending mods were relatively renowned within Mass Effect circles, the movement didn't stop there: accepting the unlikeliness of an official remaster, these dedicated tinkerers decided to work on a complete 4K overhaul of the entire trilogy, as well as orchestrating their own original mods to boot.

    [...]

    The only meaningful downside in my opinion, is that ME2 and ME3 DLCs bundles (even on sale) aren't costing any less than 25€ together. Which is objectively nuts after a decade. And when you can get the whole trilogy for less than half. But that's EA gonna EA.

    Shootout to our resident member @Methanhydrat for also being part of these modders.


  2. https://www.reddit.com/r/RocketLeague/comments/etiih3/update_on_refunds_for_macos_and_linux_players/

    They are simply transitioning to dx11 at the end of the day, lol.

    Which makes porting to opengl non-trivial on UE3 (or at least this is the impression I get from developers and observation).
    And with OSX being out of the way for other reasons, I could see why it couldn't make commercial sense for somebody not-that-super-much caring about the community.


  3. There's also open flash

    Anyway, just like shumway, any one of these thingies are going to hit a roadblock if browsers don't implement content handlers

    On 9/1/2019 at 9:11 AM, AnotherGills said:

    With the phasing out of Adobe Flash slowly on the horizon, many classic Flash-based games would be seemingly lost to the ether.

    Internet explorer will be with us for the decades to come to be honest.


  4. It is possible (for as much as I don't think google tracks "eyes time"), still I was just saying I really don't feel like I can help with that.  

    If really we needed some better "welcoming" of users, I'd rather have more key points if any.

    If you want to make a wikipedia-like introduction, explaining the game genre, how the game plays and whatnot.. Seriously, what's the point for somebody that already ideally has the game in his hands? And if you are going as far as to imagine a future where people would straight look here for info rather than wikipedia itself.. I don't think we really can and should compete.


  5. 14 hours ago, Andytizer said:

    very large communities]

    The communities should be "useful" probably, rather than just big for their sake. Though I guess most of times, there really isn't a difference between the two ideas.

    And "just having a presence on a big website" shouldn't necessarily qualify you either. If the game is on steam, ok, its community pages are an automatic go-to place for everybody.

    But just because a subreddit exists, if it's not "busy" I wouldn't see much sense into it.

    14 hours ago, Andytizer said:

    we should limit it to say, 2-3 communities

    I would argue that's already enough to cover without any "need of arbitration" 99% of games.

    14 hours ago, Andytizer said:

    Move official website into infobox (like Company pages)

    That's smart - considering most of time those don't provide even information.

     

    For the remainder, I get you'd like a conversational introduction and I (sorta) see where you are coming from. But I personally struggle to see any way in which this wouldn't sensibly dilute the clarity of fixes and everything else.


  6. On 6/29/2019 at 3:40 AM, regnr8 said:

    In some instances, when newcomers arrive on a wiki page, it is valuable to be able to connect with members of that gaming community.

    I couldn't concur more with this.

    Especially for older games, it's invaluable to know where the last survivors use to hang at.

    On 6/29/2019 at 3:40 AM, regnr8 said:

    From what I understand after having a conversation with staff in the PCGamingWiki Disord server, having this link posted under General Information goes against the wiki policy.

    Because once upon a time we had a douche (or maybe it was two) war editing, and nobody of us was knowledgeable of such community, and somehow rather than just ban him for *uncivil* and completely reckless behavior, somebody thought that if we had a requirement for officiality, then a reasonable person wouldn't have attempted such edits in the first place....

    But by all means, wiki means you can and should question the rules too.

    And indeed, it doesn't make sense. General information should provide, you know, information (put even aside whatever psychological argument you could do about "what does the user need on top of the page"). And "being official" is just so completely tangential to it.

    The official Mass Effect's answers.ea.com website could be probably beaten by an *archived* copy of the old bioware forums probably. And TES games without nexusmods are like a planet without a sun. And so on.

    Then, of course it's not so automatic anymore - but nobody is forcing anyone to add info, if he's not sure.

    And I'm not seeing the point in listing communities separately. Unless perhaps a game had like a dozen, all equally worth.. But at that point does it even make sense if they are so widespread and diverse (e.g. minecraft)?


  7. On 6/7/2019 at 3:45 PM, Andytizer said:

    Wikis don't offer technical information

    False

    Then of course, not every wiki can be as thorough as ME one. But if any this should be the determinant factor. 

    Is that an actually useful resource, perhaps with many people to get in touch with, or is just like ten not-even-finished pages?

    On 6/7/2019 at 5:02 PM, Aemony said:

    This touches partially on what PCGW wants to be, and cover. PCGW have included mentions of official/community wikis as well as "fan sites" as acceptable being listed in the General information section for years now, and while perhaps a wiki haven't been listed in all cases, it is one of the more frequently seen links of articles. This is one of the least "technical-focused" aspects of articles, and is more about general information about the universe of the game etc.

    I'm really desperately in need of an answer to this too.


  8. I don't necessarily object in principle to broadening the scope of the wiki, though perhaps you should write down your vision for the records.

    For example, ages ago I was already giving "strategy advices" (for as much as due to bugs), but uh.. I'd hope we aren't entering into competition with strategywiki any time soon?

    Anyway back in topic, I think I see now the "search a puzzle game to play in coop" idea.

    But is it actually realistic? Because perhaps it's just me to be detached, but if I had a friend irl and I wanted to play with him, I would just search for the couch gaming list. I wouldn't really care if I'm shooting in first person like left 4 dead or isometrically like in lara croft and the guardian of light. Or I'm not shooting at anything because it's rayman. Insofar as the game is good at supporting and encouraging us.

    I know some "very clumsy" individuals that are super-not-good with any kind of keyboard/controller then, which may usually prefer some genre rather than another.. But a "doesn't require much coordination" dedicated property would be way better in this scenario.

    And I cannot think to anything else the genre would matter tbh.


  9. "Modes" can still be somehow functional to fixes. In the sense that, if a game is 2D, some video settings rows perhaps may not apply.

    "Genres"? I'm starting to loose the sense of the wiki. Did the discussion about becoming general purpose happen while I was AFK?


  10. Reinventing the wheel to "sound like wikipedia" (very nice analogy) may even do wonders for SEO. But, moving back to the sake of content itself... that's already covered by Wikipedia indeed?

    And even more importantly, I don't see in which form whatsoever that would help the general quick and clear readability of the page?

    Yes, there are games which you could write almost a book with all the essential, initial, procedures - but I would argue most of them just has some stupid specific fix here and there. If really somebody wanted to revolutionize a players life, an applet that scans installed games and preemptively offer fixes to be applied automatically would be it imo.

    If instead we talk about Glossary pages (look, a distinct reason to keep a separate namespace s:) and similar instead, of course Wikipedia wording would be golden. And we would actually provide some added value.

    IMO you also seem to mix too much the problems behind verification, quantification, objectivity and.. laziness/stupidity/carelessness of novice editors.

    I'm at least very glad you could find the time to note down your POV on the new vision® though.


  11. You are really presenting just too.. odd interpretations.

    First of all, I'm not even sure how physically sound cards could be "full" 24-bit, considering I'm not aware of hardware even approaching the complete 144dB dynamic range.

    Second Windows automatically outputs 16-bit (even if 24 bit is selected) if the source is 16-bit. Legitly.

    Third, and most of all, there are people with thousands and thousands and thousands of dollars of equipment, that still couldn't find differences from the lowest 16/44.

    https://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Glossary_talk:Sound#x16_bit_is_just_good_2534


  12. Ehrm.. My own limited tests picture another situation.

    It's not super fair to compare dedicated soundcards to a Realtek (even though, this fared relatively good here) but benchmarks made already under Vista shows Creative has more to share with the latter category. So.. I'm wondering how much this is up to the driver, and how much actually the OS. Are you sure all enhancements are disabled? Are the outputs all set to stereo? And could you try normal 16-bit @ 44.1/48 khz?

    Then I'm also no psychologist, but I feel like you really seem *hoping* too much into clueless explanations (no, Dolby just team up for multi-channel endeavors)

    ALC887--->Xonar DX

    RMAA.png.56d30592ba68eb995e32cdd7903b966a.pngALC887-->ALC887

    RMAA2.PNG.5c33cb476f7f42a8fbd85161f254a564.PNG

    (full disclosure: I didn't post other results, because noise in the garbled mess of cables I have behind my computer is killer)


  13. And if I understand correctly with my level of English, it is possible that hardware acceleration and processing on hardware has returned to Windows 10, maybe partially.

    Please, really, it seems like you are going all over the place with buzzwords.

    "Hardware offload" is a thing again starting from ~W8. But putting aside this should be mostly targeted at power saving needs IIRC (I had written it already somewhere).. could we please stop to fetishize the word hardware? There's nothing intrinsically better (and EAX is also supported in OpenAL games for the records)

     

    Windows 7 discrepancies also still doesn't make sense tbh.

    If you say ASIO/OpenAL/WASAPI exclusive mode are good, then it's certainly not the driver, and it must be indeed something the OS does.

    But I'm pretty on the relative sure side microsoft wouldn't be so dumb to screw up even the simplest of the plain test cases...

     

    And please take notice, every "test article" before 2012 is mot since that's when they released an important fix.

    There seems to be truth over the mixing being kind of forced though.. Even though I'm not sure anything of that could still explain *noise*.

     

    Could you check any whatever combination of bit depth and sampling rate please?

     

    p.s. W10 doesn't seem flawless either.


  14. Windows 10 also has (supports) DRM for audio, and in no way I'm seeing how that would apply to analog outputs nevertheless.
    Why in the world would you be so sure about it responsible for quality degradation?
    For as much as I know it may be as well you are using different drivers.

    EDIT: or the fact different Windows versions come with different APOs enabled by default.
     
    Then I must admit I had initially underestimated W10 improvements.
    Every application should indeed save off some millisecond, by merit of a reworked audio engine.
     
    In addition to that, querying and selection of lower buffer sizes should also be possible.
    But I'd be wary about greatly underlining this, since it requires for software to be updated with IAudioClient3, and for driver to support DEVPKEY_KsAudio_PacketSize_Constraints

    My hats off for the testing then.


  15. Writing down the important revelations of the discord chat:

    So many, many, many games have very lazily determined (if not hands down wrong) system requirements.

    The most straightly patent ones being OS/Dx version and HDD/RAM space.

     

    Default, unless proven otherwise, would always be official system requirements of course.

    Nobody is asking editors to cross-check the hell out of every possible hardware combination.

     

    If by any chance though, any incongruence was to be spotted, we could "fix" them, just like we fix the actual games themselves.

    The individual change would have to be marked as "Verified by user X" then, and I cannot see how anything of value would be lost.

     

    ...

    Proceeding with the reasoning, with time (and enough agreement on what could count as "minimum", say 640x480@30fps w/ lowest available settings) this could even be extended to CPU/GPU.

    Contrarily to how I was banging my head above, there shouldn't really be to bother too much on "how to emulate lower specs".

    If somebody comes out with a data point, good for him and the game. Otherwise with the "official first" policy, we could do as well just fine as without.

     

    Heavy hacks could be mentioned in other information section, but just like standard policy is not to consider "true" those things, neither should they enter the "straight" table.

     

    *Then* after all of this, we could think to some "threshold of potato-ness" (be it explicit "runs on a pedal P4 microwave oven" or implicit "runs on a very slow CPU"). Which nowadays could even be automatized with parsers.


  16. So.. I kinda skipped most of the post.
    Indeed, most of those threads should just be disregarded, given it's mostly me arguing ad nauseam with some this-much-craze dudes - and a normal person shouldn't have much to learn from them (though there are thoughtful insights here and there).
     
    Now remembering everyone DRM means "Digital1 Rights Management" (where management is arguably an euphemism for "restriction"), I'll just post some axioms I hope everybody will agree2:

    • f* law or EULAs: this is just about principles
    • upfront paying is not restricting one's rights
    • accounts protecting paywalls aren't restricting one's rights
    • requesting use of a specific software for download/transit/retrieval is not restricting one's rights3 (we could argue whether present lack of an open source alternative is restriction - but then what's you to stop from doing something like this?)
    • moreover installation nor [whatever it is] preparation should be restricting one's rights. Only there is where the game appears and is granted to you, physically4.
    • ...
    • External "dependencies" aren't necessarily restricting one's rights. Being portable is usually a consequence of being drm-free, but I concur "failure"4 to be so may not strictly offend
    • [Functionally5 unnecessary] external external dependencies (as in "material", like a cd-key6, or "the net") for game to function are restrictions of one's rights7.
    • Obfuscation or anti-tampering of binary code is not restricting one's rights8(might be controversial: but assuming you condone "proprietary", then this is not any different than selling you a phone with a "low iFixit score")
    • Machine-specific "locks" are restrictions of one's rights (not much per simply se, but more because they require aforementioned external stuff to further work)
    • Drm-free might still be hackable, for the records. Say, ubisoft games bought on steam not requiring the latter if launched with a switch, or safedisc ones with unsafedisc.

    You might notice I listed those claims "in order" from "source" to "end use" (kinda).
    With a blank wonder in the middle, which would correspond to whatever happens from "everything has been downloaded" to "everything is 100% ready to be played"
    The only wonder I'm left with, personally, is *how* "first launch" should be considered separately from previous phases9
    And similarly, when "the starting point" can be considered the installer (if present), instead of the actual game unpacked files.

    1Personal showerthought: is this adjective just to describe the circumstances in which whatever else applies ("in a digital world"), or actually the methods ("in a digital way")?
    2And if not, well, they are so clear cut, neat and explicit that at least no way we can spin around in circles, in a loop with no visible end.
    3There's no conceptual difference between a fully fledged internet browser, and a "dedicated software downloader".
    And if you think so, you are conflating the deservedness of your rights with mere convenience. And shame on you for lowering the level of the discussion.
    4IMO a registry dependency shouldn't count towards this. Aside of "its intent" not being that, a devil's advocate could just say that the installer is what instead is thereby granted you.
    It would conflict with the previous point though. A quick hotfix for this dilemma could be considering the installer OR the game in the equation.
    5Requiring some random crazy codec, or flash, for in-game FMVs is dumb - still philosophically justified. What about online authentication for online games though?
    6Though.. What about games/dlcs that got a free public key for everybody to use? E.g. Mass effect dlcs. I fail to find a restriction in such a case.
    7If *I attempt* to use SteamAPI as a drm - what happens?
    8Yes, I very well know this seems worded specifically to excuse a very pesky software... Still. I'll talk about it in a moment.
    9Yes, I know what you might be saying: it's evident. I don't know. Functionally it seems just a matter of labels where to say "this is where you are left on your own, bye" and "we are still finishing with you"


    With these considerations (I'm tired, sorry) making up a perfect definition of drm shouldn't be that hard.
    Once we get that carved in stone, all the aforementioned examples should simply come consequential.
     
    And even without, well, I think operationally we'd still be good to go - in the meantime.


  17. Oh look, that's me.
    It has nothing necessarily to do with 3D or HRTF (for as much eventually, every reverb EAX adds may contribute to the illusion for example)

    Anyway, long story short is that the eax "row" originated way before we had the middleware/api proprieties.
    It could even make sense to move everything there then.. But I must say I'm not totally sold to the idea.

    I mean.. Nowadays who the hell cares? API is almost always XAudio2 - "encyclopedic" would be almost an overstatement of its importance.
    Rightly, it's in the other information table.

    But assume we were talking about DirectSound, Aureal or even OpenAL?
    In that case a link to sound card glossary is mandatory.
    And it would totally deserve a place in the main audio settings section (especially given the usual connection between this and surround)

    In the past I had just suggested to rename the field's name.. I wouldn't know now.
    Maybe a good first start could be resuming the "what's even in a middleware" discussion.

    See you all somewhen else

×
×
  • Create New...