Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Mirh

  1. On 5/7/2020 at 5:48 AM, Antrad said:

    I'm not going to fight it, I just wanted to express my opinion. I will continue to focus on the classic sections on the game pages.

    Feature creep of the infobox is absolutely a thing though imo. From mobygames (there would be a point for that on wikipedia if any) to the official website (which really did nothing wrong on general information).

    On 5/9/2020 at 12:22 PM, Waschbär said:

    What I'm trying to say is: If that taxonomy stuff isn't ready or properly presentable yet, it shouldn't be part of the editing guidelines.

    I think this is more a problem of the style the editing guidelines are written in, then really "the background stuff".

    I had told ThatOneReaper he was being overly "solemn" while writing them, but to no avail I guess. You shouldn't really feel obliged to complete every field, if you cannot be bothered.

  2. On 5/9/2020 at 7:24 PM, Andytizer said:

    I am thinking we could easily make a dedicated space for 'skip intro videos', and at the same time we could track some new values to do with videos (or non-interactive sections) within games

    I agree having fixes for stopping and skipping cutscenes is important, but aren't we inflating too much the amount of things we track? Like, what's the point of looking at a game starting from that information? We should have fixes.. but we aren't trying to build some knowledge engine.

    And I don't really think tracking skip videos is worth a dime.

    On 5/10/2020 at 10:47 AM, Aemony said:

    That was primarily to prevent the section from taking up huge space on top of the article while still allowing it to grow to whatever space is deemed necessary by editors to properly document the various alternative methods available.

    I understood that, but I'm failing to see in which situation the alternatives would be worth anything, if they don't deserve as much attention as the supposedly main one.

  3. On 5/9/2020 at 1:07 PM, Garrett said:

    There was a previous discussion about removing "settings" from the headings. Some of the templates already have information which is a feature rather than an actual setting (e.g. input settings has "Steam Input API support"), so a row for CD audio would not be the first case like that.

    I wasn't saying that it clashes with the title, but actually with the mood of all others option. They are all of a somewhat "artistic choice" kind. You can rename it as you want, but it shouldn't be a bin where you throw everything and the kitchen sink.

    And indeed, Steam input API should absolutely go in the API table. 

    Then I guess like you might be right, that just using winmm is not enough for CD-DA support (even though I wonder why just about all the fixes I have seen relied on a patched _inmm.dll). Wait. But that's actually what you care for?

    That's what's broken in new windows. What else is there? If you were directly reading yourself the CD like a music player, then nothing should change on your side.

  4. On 5/5/2020 at 12:20 AM, Andytizer said:

    The Achievements column in Availability shouldn't be a tick box - it should contain the same store icons as DRM. The column should state whether you get achievements:

    • In-game 
    • GOG Galaxy
    • Steam
    • Uplay
    • Microsoft
    • Rockstar

    This is a pretty good list. But it should be a property of savegames (or something along that) then, rather than platform-specific.

    Otherwise it's pretty stupid to repeat everywhere that for example mass effect has in-game achievements (and hell, I wonder if some games couldn't have both in-game and platform-specific).

  5. Video/audio/input "and nothing" seems just so anonymous.

    I don't even mind "settings" to stick then to be honest, but at least if you have to remove it have something like "features" in its place.

    Putting even aside that I don't think stuff like AO, bloom and illumination should go in video settings... or at least not without some unholy revamp.

  6. Mhh.. I like this automatism, but for some reason having it in the audio settings doesn't really "check" in my mind.

    Yes, of course it is audio-related, but it so much out of tune with the "semantic area" of the other rows.


    Perhaps, is there the possibility this could be pegged to the use of a specific API?

  7. 17 hours ago, Antrad said:

    Maybe the bigger problem is the word "ESSENTIAL" in the title. People put links to patches there, but is every patch really essential ? No it is not.

    Yes it is.

    If then morons put "look, we retextured fishes inside an aquarium", that's a whole different story.

    See also my recent edit about the widescreen fix in GTA:SA, for a more nuanced example of what can be considered as such.

    1 hour ago, Aemony said:

    that I can imagine might be doable is to move the larger such sections that includes more than one alternative down to “Other information“ while retaining a link to said section in the “Essential improvements” section

    I mean.. If we even offer multiple alternatives to begin with there must be a reason.

    And I really struggle to see how you could have one that still justifies a mention, but at the same time have it just relegated on the bottom of the page.

  8. 25 minutes ago, Antrad said:

    In my opinion everything not related to getting the games fixed or improved is a waste of people's time and spreads the project and community thin.

    I agree that the benefit/bother ratio is quite abysmal.

    Though, you can see how and why, if it isn't us to be able to offer queries for "games that can be hacked with local coop with a 3rd person perspective", nobody else could. 

    Of course there should be some thought behind, and not "let's just put in everything and the kitchen sink"...

    25 minutes ago, Antrad said:

    This site is slowly creeping into Moby Games territory adding stuff like this, the ratings or whatever comes next.

    Lol, that has actually already landed in some pages.


  9. I don't really have a hard opinion, but last time I checked this was the thing most people were more happily commenting about.

    Also, arguably, for many many games it's the only actual fix we offer.

    If any I have always been a supporter of "not having dozens of useless alternatives".

    For example, a command line parameter is definitively better than deleting videos, if not any at least for steam cache verification purposes. Then I would say you get in order ini editing, file deleting and file replacing (and of course then you have outliers like GTA:SA, but I digress).

  10. So, as I have been pointed out, more than "this platform does or doesn't support achievements", there's also the hidden premise of "this store now does, but when this game originally released they didn't". Meaning that indeed, it's nontrivial to know whether the game updated or not.

    *Still*, even though I suppose we could properly introduce all kinds of flags and proprieties in the availability table (which could in turn hook cloud saving), I'm wondering if just stating it out in the notes couldn't already be enough.

  11. Are there really games that, once they have achievements on a platform, don't replicate those on the others (as long as they support themselves the feature to begin with)?

    Or better yet, is this such a common thing that you couldn't just casually mention it in the availability notes?

  12. So, after some weeks as you may know I have some notes.

    First, smaller ones. There are many microtransactions categories that don't seem like having much of a strong "identity" as they are currently worded.

    Why working with the spotless property (which then requires the "2006 disclaimer"), when you could just mark games having microtransactions and that's it? It had its reasons behind, on a website just completely focused on mtx, but in something with a much more comprehensive scope it actually is itself a pimple.

    Then, assuming free-to-grind entails "in a reasonable time frame".. how is this more than just some kind of "logical opposite" of pay to win? I see how such kind of tag could have a pretty negative connotation, but at the end of the day, isn't this the real quick-to-understand buzzword (if you can excuse the term) readers are tuned to?

    Further free-to-play could better underline its more or less "slim" difference with freeware (something like "similarly to the previous entry, you can enjoy the most important/relevant/main parts of the game without paying a dime, but there are also actually paid unlocks."), and how therefore the tag may or may not be harmless (e.g. AFAIK Apex Legends is pretty legit with its mtx, but Combat Arms or Metin were pay to win juggernauts back in the day).

    And last but not least for the tiny chery picks: I really don't see any point in distinguishing DLCs from expansions. I understand why there is this kind of.. subtle undertone to each word, but at the same time it seems pointless to arbitrarily divide content into a ">X hours length category" and "<X hours length category". I mean, microtransactions would still deserve their own separate category then, but if we aren't talking about patently small content, I don't personally care as an user if the game has "ten missions sold separately" or together (as long as the price is fitting).

    But I'll come back to this later and perhaps everybody will be happy.


    Now, something odd to talk about: the very same "complete" tag (aka "bundle") I had managed to get gutted 3 weeks ago.

    A little refresher on my original criticism.

    To say whether a bundle gives you the "whole experience" or not (which is what the user eventually cares for), you cannot just quickly verify it from "technical aspects" of the game (such as whether the "new story" requires the original game, or it is standalone). Because there's no necessary relationship between this and the extent on the plot.*
    But there's also another problem. Evaluating the plot (or whatever combination of "artistic aspects") is its own huge can of worms. I reckon it can be done, but having to explicitly word out one's judgments should be the exception, not the rule every time.
    Hence it seemed DOA.

    BUT thinking to the dire state of XCOM2 dlcs had a light bulb flash on my head.
    I'm specifically pissed off because there is no [convenient and handy, but I suppose this come easy as a result] bundle that can give me straight away all the game content.
    Like there's this dlc, and then this other, but that sometimes comes with this bundle but you may have bought the "deluxe edition" which has instead this other stuff... And not only it feels a ripoff that as a newcomer I cannot "take advantage of their cumulative savings", you even get to wonder if that content is even supposed to be relevant at all**

    I call this the "commercial aspect", and I think it could be an actually workable criterion. It could even take into account of the half-serious joke I made about distinguishing between "this new content is reasonable to exist and be sold separately" vs "this is just cut content they want to screw you with".

    And here is where distinguishing major and minor content could even have its sense. You wouldn't expect an expansion as big as War of the Chosen to be included with the base game, would you?***
    Or I mean.. nowadays you wouldn't even expect the most stupid of the skins to come for free, but 11 years ago it was fairly normal for minor content to be free post-release. Both Battlefield and Call of Duty did for example.****

    Does any of this make sense?


    *Think to Half-Life: Opposing Force and Crysis Warhead for example. Only one is standalone, but their side story doesn't relate all that differently from their respective base games.

    **e.g. I understand the backstory of the h3h3 Character Pack in Payday 2, and I don't care if the Ultimate Edition didn't came with it. On the other hand having Shen's Last Gift nowhere makes it seems trash, despite the situation not being like that.
    And then we also have multiple offenders like EA, that not only could not make a comprehensive ME2 or ME3 pack once.. they couldn't even deign to include the ME2 and ME3 dlcs in the damn Mass Effect Trilogy.

    ***Or even just being in a bundle! At least in the first months since release. Yes this would amend my original idea, but it still sounds doable. I mean.. Any sane player of the game would know it's pretty beefy and important, am I right? The same could be also said about The Witcher 3: Blood and Wine.. Arma 3: Apex is where I would start already to have doubts.

    ****Speaking of which, MW2 happens to have a bundle. But (at least on steam) the individual products bought separately would come *cheaper* than that. So funny to wonder whether this should count or not against our aim.


    It has come to my attention while wrapping up this post, that the XCOM 2: Reinforcement Pack contained inside the XCOM 2 Collection, does in turn contains the three dlcs that I thought had been omitted.

    GG 2K? Thankfully my reasoning should still stand.

    I hope this may be an example and encouragement for constructive criticism even for somebody else other than the usual 2-3 masterminds. 😃

  13. As I'm sure I suggested elsewhere

    You can have "our" ratings describe universal concepts, as detailed above, and just leave overly specific cases (like the literal 3840x2160 resolution, and only that) to the WSGF ratings.

    Some rewording brainstorm will be needed, but I cannot see any other way that could cover all and every scenario.

  14. You can even use a license such as the MPL if you want to cover your ass against "predatory forking", you know. Assume I wanted it to work on windows XP, or ARM, or whatever? I'd just feel awkward to me to be banging my head against a game.. Groping for whatever chink in the black box I may be able to spot from the outside, and knowing deep down my tool of choice has the same fundamental downside.

  15. This is the coolest thing I have ever seen here, and a long time coming.

    I had always imagined a FlawlessWidescreen-like UI, but even this super-sleek one is nice.

    And I have no problems with selling it at a price (in fact if there was a closer collaboration with PCGW, it could be as well somehow somewhat integrated with our patreon)

    But is it open-source? Because otherwise it doesn't really feel "ours to own".

  16. 50 minutes ago, Mr. Doomguy said:

    out of nowhere NVIDIA has stepped in and provided the following contributions to this project

    • NVIDIA Format Modifiers - Provide better performance in compressed layers. Will be available in the upcoming Linux kernel 5.7
    • Signed firmwares for GeForce 16 series (1600 and 1650 series)

    While this is surprising nice approach it still lacks a specific firmware to deal with poor performance from GTX 900 series to newer and we have yet to receive an open source Vulkan driver which Nouveau still lacks.

    It's not really out of nowhere. It should be part of their work into a new memory allocator.

    Also, just as a matter of fact and very technically speaking, reclocking is a thing even on maxwell. It's just that it can only work safely in situations where the gpu isn't in charge of its own cooling.

    3 hours ago, Mr. Doomguy said:

    NIR support + OpenGL 4.6 support for R600 Gallium3D driver used by AMD HD 2000 series to HD 6000 series.

    Mhh no. Nir/sfn only supports dx11 cards for the moment (if not even only evergreen).

    And even then, I'm not sure it gets past opengl 4 as for feature sets working in full.

    50 minutes ago, Mr. Doomguy said:

     DXVK received 1.5.5 release which only includes bugfixes. New major release will happen once all the regressions have been fixed.

    d3d9.evictManagedOnUnlock  got fixed though. It may seem a small thing, but that's actually the hopeful setting that might solve out of memory issues in many 32-bit games.

  • Create New...