"new backend for AMD GPUs (Linux support on that due in Blender 3.1),"
even blender thread us like second class citizen now?
or its amd fault?

in any case, we might have lost one of our biggest advantages...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpE2B2QSsa0 [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: mr-victoryHow much demand is there for Steam on ChromeOS/Chromebooks? I don’t think there is much (I expect it is way less than %1.16 linux market share on Steam) as the main purpose of these devices is browsing the web. And these devices are often managed by schools/organisations.

i dont know but they were selling a lot of games for the educational market, it was the first machine of a lot of people since it was dirty cheap and their parents could afford, the lack of games didndt shy the parents who purchased so their kids could study, if google could make those kids play on their chromebooks, their first machine could as well "be the last", but they cant.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: Mohandevir

Quoting: Purple Library GuySo who feels like they're only going ahead with this because Stadia is failing?

Maybe, but the Borealis project was started a while ago... Even before Stadia's official release, if my memory doesn't fail me... It might be a factor explaining why they are giving up that quickly on Stadia, though.

I just figure if Stadia had really taken off they would likely have let this wither on the vine. It's a fallback. One they knew they might need, so they made overtures and started plans, but if Stadia meant they didn't need this I suspect their first preference would have been to do a kind of Apple-but-in-the-cloud thing, controlling the whole experience end to end . . . and incidentally, not depending on the little Chromebooks' actual on-board capabilities as much.

wich make a hell lot of sense, chromebook main advantage is the price, but if you need an expensive hardware to game on, then this advantage go out of the window, the same goes for stadia.

if stadia were sucessfull valve could capitalize in an market of cheap devices that windows simply cant, nor with microsoft charging for their licences, it would be a win win situation for google.

people complain that stadia games dont run on desktop native, but if we think about it, if google paid to port to any* distro, then they would spend millions of dollars for the port of each game, and may make almost 0 on return of investment because people may purchase their games on steam etc instead, no one is paid to be impartial, what valve is doing is alost an miracle.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

that make things... interesting.
google is struggling to sell stadia, so steam is quite important for chromebook gamers, google will have to work harder on making sure steam work flawless on chromebooks (aka, make sure their sandbox for linux native apps dont have any major flaw) if they want to enter the operating system market.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: jordicomaNice. Hope that the changes are the self tapping screws. And probably I'll find a screen protector, even with the case shouldn't be a problem.

most likely its the B button that was lasting nothing

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slapinTo me, Godot 3.x weak point lies not in render but in data model design, especially how it handles geometry.
Everything can be bypassed in Godot except that, and that is major problem preventing implementation of streaming systems = no larger worlds :(
Updating geometry produce major stuttering and consumes most of frame, and it is impossible to do partial updates (i.e. index buffer only).

you mean stuff like level of details? i saw an plugin for that.
but texture stream is an feature that godot indeed lack.

now, if only we could have something like nanite, lumen and asset stream...

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slapinGodot 4 is looking too far into the future as well as they drop OpenGL support and 3.x branch does have major bottlenecks preventing creating large 3D projects with it...

actually, godot 4 will drop openGL support, but godot 4.x will add it back, they had 3 options at hand:

1)try to make both renders at once and delay both renders.
2)try to make the vulkan render first and delay the openGL render for an 4.x version.
3)try to make the openGL render first and delay the vulkan render for an 4.x version.

they chose the second option, so if you absolutelly need to have GL suport you have to stick with the 3.x branch, in any case some features were backported to it from the 4.x branch =p

Quoting: slapinI wonder what is easier to do - add OpenGL support back to Godot 4 or O3DE? Also I don't see major improvements overall for Godot 4 except for graphics, so I guess most major bottlenecks are still there, right?

well godot 3.x added more features than i was expecting, so i think the 4.0 may have more features than initially planned as well.

in any case both engines come from different dictions.

lumbeyard was so painfull/hard to use that no one wanted to use it, but they had an triple A quality render.
godot was so good and easy to use that many indies are migrating to it or starting to learn game development on it, and now its geting an better render to better compete in the market of engines with cuting edge graphics.

only the future can tell what engine will be more sucessfull, i think both will co exist for a long time, and i hope both can borrow code from each other, o3de (formely know as lumbeyard) can learn from godot how to be easier to use (and maybe even add gdscript support or some similiar script lang)
and godot may be able to borrow advanced code techniques from lumbeyard or maybe even have a lot of options of renders (the same way blender do have with cycles, eevee, the intel developed one, the amd developed one etc)
*im not sure if it was amd or nvidia or both have their own solutions.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ZlopezIt's sad to see that most of the big companies are giving more money to marketing than actual development. I understand that you need marketing so the market is aware of the product, but the product itself should have some quality and not only good advertisement.

actually, many games are expensive to make too, i forgot to mention that about 75% of the budget is marketing, in the case of GTA5 it was 100 millions but only because at the scale they did their marketing it was impossible to put more money into it than they already put. (i mean, if some one didnt purchased the game already with their marketing than this person would not buy for any reason no matter how many ads they see)
that said, i think many companies already invest in their game as much as they can, puting more people at the project would not translate into more quality, i would just make the management more of an hell than it already is, i think the reason why a lot of games launched with tons of bugs has more to do with poor management than not puting enough money into it.
there are exceptions of course, nintendo games dont seem to be the type of game with an huge cost of production, they make simpler graphics but with a gameplay that is very polished instead of focusing on cuting edge graphics, they can invest more than they do but dont.
and gamefreak is lazy as hell, they can put a LOT more effort into their games.
i cant comment in many individual cases, i didnt played much in the last 10 years.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PhiladelphusA modern AAA game, sure. I doubt most indie games (of which there are vastly more than AAA games) cost more than a few million to develop

omg i say the words AAA and Triple A or blockbuster all the freaking time, i cant believe i forgot right now.
on the other hand, people always complain when i use those terms.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

100k? aside from fortinite players it might as well have more user than the official client, that thing suck

View this comment - View article - View full comments