Quoting: Pengling

Quoting: EgonautI don't know where that 75GB come from, it only consumes 39GB here.

Fantastic to hear! :grin: I wonder why the Steam page lists it as 75GB? :unsure:

can confirm the 39GiB number:

 
xxx@Sineya:~$ du -hs .steam/steam/steamapps/common/Ratchet\ \&\ Clank\ -\ Rift\ Apart/
39G .steam/steam/steamapps/common/Ratchet & Clank - Rift Apart/

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Egonaut

Quoting: PenglingAfter all, the specs look pretty reasonable, aside from the massive 75GB of storage that's required for it!

I don't know where that 75GB come from, it only consumes 39GB here.

Quoting: F.UltraSo this being the first game to use DirectStorage 1.2 that all the Windows fanbois are up in arms about so will be interesting to see how loading times will be in WINE/Proton here vs native Windows.

DirectStorage works with Wine/Proton as well. On my PC with a PCIe4 SSD the Portal jumps are pretty seamless. On the Deck not so much. Can take up to 3 seconds.

Quoting: sarmadYeah, I'm interested to see how this performs on the Deck. I doubt it'll be as seamless as it is on PS5.

It runs at pretty stable 30 FPS on lowest settings with FSR. It's playable, if you really want to play it on the Deck.

Yeah but I would assume that Wine/Proton as of now only implemented it to just work, aka using the normal open+read+close for the file API and if lucky enable GDeflate for nVidia (AMD and Intel have not implemented it in Vulkan yet). Don't seem to matter much though because I saw zero stutters or load times up to the first boss battle (at which point it crashed, but I see on Steam that it crashes for a lot of Windows users aswell) and then it was 04:00 in the night so had to stop playing anyway. :)

exit: just checked the source of wine, proton and vkd3d and there is no implementation of the DirectStorage API whatsoever.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

So this being the first game to use DirectStorage 1.2 that all the Windows fanbois are up in arms about so will be interesting to see how loading times will be in WINE/Proton here vs native Windows. On nVidia the latest Linux drivers (v525.47.04) does support the GDeflate extension to Vulkan that is part of this (AFAIK AMD have not implemented it though) but I have no idea if VKD3D utilizes this extension yet or not.

And for the rest DirectStorage 1.0) something like io_uring should work equally well or better but I don't know if WINE/Proton have started to utilize io_uring yet either.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ZeloxI really think this is good. Blizzard was dead once activision got their hands on them. And it’s been going worse and worse every year.

Microsoft really have some good games, they seem to release stable and solid games. I also hope this can change the culture in blizzard and bring them back to not just be about money and greed as activision like.

And there is still plenty of competition on the gaming market and I also hope we get to see blizzard games on steam :)

why would money changing hands at a higher level change the inside culture at blizzard? Microsoft won't do anything about this, this is only about the sales figures of CoD, this is not the CEO of Microsoft waking up in the middle of the night and worrying that Activision wrecked havoc on the Blizzard internal culture.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Purple Library Guy

Quoting: m2mg2My understanding of the BSD license and I'm no expert either is that is even freer than GPL. GPL has restrictions on how you can use the code. BSD is basically do whatever you want with it. These are license issues and have nothing to do with operating system functionality, how free it is or how respectful of it's users it is.

Well, you might not call me an expert, but I have been following licensing controversies for a long time, so indulge me a moment.

In an odd technical sense, the BSD license is indeed "even freer" than the GPL. An analogy is, a state of law in which absolutely everything is permissible, is freer than a state of law in which everything is permissible except enslaving people. However, it does not feel freer to the slaves, only to those exercising their freedom by doing the enslaving.

So, leaving analogy, the distinction between the BSD license and the GPL is that the GPL insists that all derivative works stay GPL. The BSD license allows derivative works to be anything, including closed; people can basically relicense BSD works at will, including relicensing them as ordinary commercial software.

It is important to note that this has no impact on pre-existing versions. It's not like someone who holds the copyright on software they released as BSD can suddenly close all the copies everyone else already has--it's just the version they are continuing to develop that might now be closed. So, BSD software that someone starts developing closed versions of, can be forked and the fork could still be open--it could be BSD, or heck, you could fork a piece of BSD software and release that derivative version as GPL. Nobody ever does because it would be really rude, but you could.

So OK, what was someone saying about Red Hat and some stuff they do that apparently is BSD licensed? Yeah, if they're doing stuff and they have it BSD licensed they could totally close it, and if they're the main or only ones using and developing it, there probably wouldn't be a fork, and anyway if the main use case was in software they were distributing, then yeah, suddenly people would be getting some closed stuff in their Linux, and there would be nothing legal to stop that.

But it's not going to happen. I myself am very much pro-GPL and pro-Copyleft. But in practice, the BSD license has mostly been pretty stable, just because taking BSD licensed stuff proprietary is seen as, well, really rude. It's bad publicity and there isn't usually much benefit. There have been a few fairly high profile exceptions, but the spectre many (including me) feared in the early days, of BSD code turning out to be useless as Free Software because corporations would grab the nice open code and develop their own proprietary versions and get everyone to use that and effectively kill the open source version, just hasn't materialized. There are a number of reasons for this: Fork something and you have to maintain it, fork something and try to monetize it and you're competing with a free product that has a better reputation than you. And also, I think the BSD license benefits somewhat from the mere existence of the GPL--it's clear that if you go around messing with the Free Software that has permissive licenses, the open source aficionados will increasingly use stricter, more copyleft licenses and get more political, and the corps would rather just let the sleeping dogs lie and use the gravy train of good software they produce.

There is no way Red Hat is about to take any of their open source software closed; anyone saying so is either naive or deliberately alarmist. Slippery slope arguments are rarely sound.

Agree to 99%, the only exception is that BSD code have been and are continuing to be closed off. The old classic example is WINSOCKS (aka the IP-stack in Windows), more modern versions are various firewall and router manufacturers that use some closed off BSD plus internal patches to drive their stuff and AFAIK ps4/ps5 is also closed off BSDs. So it does happen, now re Red Hat I'm 100% with you, they would most likely never do that.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: heidi.wengerRed Hat is now owned by IBM which once aided in committing holocaust. Why does IBM get away with this to modern day? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust [External Link]

To this and every other "IBM IS BEHIND THIS!!!" posts above I just want to point out that Red Hat representatives have come forward (they did this with the recent GPL thingy) and said that IBM have not directed Red Hat in any way shape or form, they exist as a independent brand under IBM and so far IBM have left them alone.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: hardpenguin

Supporting OpenGL, OpenGL ES, WebGL, Vulkan and Metal and it's cross-platform for Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, Windows and WebAssembly. They hope to see developers using it across the industry whether you're "working on a game, a 3D modeling application or any other project that requires top-notch graphics" they say that "IGL has got you covered".

No DirectX? That's new..

It does, it was just not on the list in the press release from Khronos

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapul

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: elmapulwhat is next, rockstar will make an patch so you cant kill any one anymore in GTA? and you will say that is not censorship?

yes that would not be censorship. You playing a video game is not you expressing your right to free speech. Rockstar changing their game so that you can't kill any one any more is actually Rockstar expressing their right to free speech.

Now Rockstar being forced to do this by a 3d party like the Government, now that would have been censorship by that 3d party. But this rarely if ever happens in our western democracies, yes the alt-right is crying loud about companies doing this do appease to "a different audience" but that is just them crying about it, as normal zero points of evidence is ever presented (which they see as proof that it is a conspiracy). Nor would it follow any forms of logic since this "other audience" is a very small group of people that would never buy the game anyway (which the companies knows full well) so that is not why they are doing changes like this (and there is also not a lot of cases of companies doing this either, I mean Skull Girls is not an example of a company even doing this and yet it will still be an a list somehwere of a situation where it happened).

you are defining the artist as an company not the individuals who work at it.
sure i dont expect nintendo to allow an creator to kill mario or anything like that, but i dont expect then to launch an game and change it for different regions, or change it after launch.
they gave their artists some creative constraints, the artists wrote, draw etc in that limitations their design goals and philosopy might be completely different if they had other constraints.

for example, if you know you cant kill an character you might try to find other ways to create an emotional impact on your art, if you writing thinking you can do that, then someone else remove that from the story, then your story might end up without any scenes of emotional impact as an result of that change.
if an company hired me to write an story and i didnt agree with the creative freedoms they gave me i could simply not help then with their project, they would be able to relase it anyway, but not slap my name in the credits with something like "from creator of X,Y,Z book/movie/game" (assuming i was famous), that is completely different from they leting me write what i want, then changing a lot of things without informing me and keeping my name in the credits.
hell the gaming industry was infamous for ghost writing in the past anyway.

and speaking on censorhsip vs freedom of expression:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWqvaMEFIdI [External Link]

Well the way things like this game works is that a bunch of creative people are signing away their creative works to the company so the company is the creator in that sense. Now for SkullGirls it also happens that the "new" company is the original designers that just created a new company due to the problems with their former boss so here there is even less a company decision as such.

Having a creator having complete expressive freedom when working for a games developer is probably something that you will never see. One of the reasons is that it is the company that is legally responsible for what said creator would create so even by that single reason no company would risk doing it.

Not sure what the reason behind bringing in a discussion of the film industry from a former dictatorship?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Craggles086

Quoting: F.Ultra

Quoting: Craggles086

Quoting: dpanterZombies make any game better! :heart:

Cannot see how Donkey Kong would have been improved by zombies.. :)

ain't you in for a surprise

DONKEY KONG ZOMBIES ★ Call of Duty Zombies Mod (Zombie Games) [External Link]

The next edition of Tower Toppler, now with extra zombies.

Always felt like Tower Toppler would feel better if the mechanics and sound were brought closer to the Commodore 64 version of Nebulus. While dodging zombies might be cool, I feel that this would be taking the game in the opposite direction.

But sure if any programmers out there want to add zombies to Tower Toppler I put my hand in to evaluate it, and compare it to the original C64 game.

Tower Toppler cross with Dark Castle anyone?

Or why not BurgerTime with Zombies :)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Craggles086

Quoting: dpanterZombies make any game better! :heart:

Cannot see how Donkey Kong would have been improved by zombies.. :)

ain't you in for a surprise

DONKEY KONG ZOMBIES ★ Call of Duty Zombies Mod (Zombie Games) [External Link]

View this comment - View article - View full comments