crispy4000

PC focused, but by proxy we may learn something about the next-gen console's capability too. Leaks are promising, especially for traditional rasterization. Questions I'd like to see answered: - Will we see a DLSS alternative, or will they double down on adaptive sharpening? - How will RT capabilities compare to NVIDIA cards? - Will we hear anything about their GPU leveraging the SSD directly? - What's a fair price for what they propose?

Delay was because performance on current gen machines wasn't up to snuff. ABOUT THE DELAY: "This situation is different" compared to previous changes to the deadline - the game for PC is ready and plays well on next-gen consoles and the company is finalizing the process concerning current gen consoles. http://biznes.pap.pl//images/favicon.ico HIGHLIGHTS: CD Projekt video games on Cyberpunk 2077 delay BIZNES.PAP.PL Following are highlights from video games developer CD Projekt's conference call held after the company announced another delay of the premiere of its much-awaited Cyberpunk 2077 release, to December 10.

Yup, Nintendoland.

All is true. But wouldn't that argument hold up better for the Dirt Rally games, which are more sim-oriented? Saw your notification as well. Yes, Destruction All Stars is no longer slated as a launch retail release. Things changed, but I was going off with what was announced at the time. It's what we knew.

The larger reality is that they don't look great by current gen standards. I'd rather have a better looking game, in general, than have a 120fps mode marketed to me as an exciting trade-off. Which, to be fair, the Dirt 5 team has leaned into from the beginning. They're getting shit because of how vocal they've been about making, in their mind, the right compromises. Under their constraints, they could very well be right about that. I don't expect racing games to look fantastic at launch anyways. Unless there was 1st party money behind them. So it's water under the bridge.

Check the date.

Like Dirt 5, it's nothing too impressive. But hey, another launch title confirmed.

Seems so. Giant Bomb also did a quicklook, said if HD rumble was kind of underwhelming for you, this is more like 'UHD rumble.'

If every launch game bombed at $70, it wouldn't be because of the price point. It's also been 15 years since the last increase. It's justified. If next-gen games went up with inflation from 2005, they should actually cost $78 today. We're getting that $70 price tag as a compromise. Special editions and DLC make up the difference, as they did this generation. It inflates used game and sale prices too. So if you really want to fight it, buy only into subscriptions. Just don't be surprised when rate hikes there come more frequently than a decade+.

Series S not getting RT effects at all. As stated earlier in this thread, Series X and PS5 get them at 1080p60/4k30fps.

I'd say that between the SSD and Raytracing possibilities, we WILL have a big leap this generation. The issue is that Sony and Microsoft didn't give most developers time to develop the tools to take advantage. They care more about not being late to market. There's a reason why NBA2K21 looks like one of the most impressive launch titles. They prioritized the tech and didn't overshoot. It shouldn't be too much to expect other companies to plan similarly. Especially platform holders, who have an obligation to generate interest.

I think there's a cyclical pattern here. Genres lose popularity, people argue those 'types of games' shouldn't full priced, publishers may stop making them. We start to see certain genres not worth the money, when in the past, most people happily paid full price and enjoyed the hell out of them. Generational price hikes are a convenient excuse for those biases to be teased out. And we all have them. You can objectively say that some games have more content than others. But for multiplayer-focused stuff especially, it's often more a question of whether its fun enough to play for 10+ hours. I don't see much of a difference between car combat games, car sim games, fighting games, sports games, CoD multiplayer, RTSs, etc in that regard. Only my personal preferences. The only real wrench in the equation today is F2P. It does change some value judgements. But it doesn't exist in a vacuum either. You need to look at what F2P games succeed and fail, in what monetization models, and that's before even comparing them to retail releases.

What about $70 for a fighting game? $70 for an arcade sports game? $70 for an RTS?

The biggest reason it didn't make sense at $70 is that it isn't an established multiplayer property, or from a pedigreed developer. The discussion would differ somewhat if it was a Twisted Metal revival instead.

Probably was more of a calculated decision than that. We'll see most PS5-exclusives be $70 going forward in any case.

Woah, it's intensive. With RT on Ultra, a 3090 can barely hit 4K 60fps with DLSS in 'performance' mode.

Who asked for a delay?

The delay explains why we haven't seen an extended cut yet. As for PS+, that's a good thing for new PS5 owners. I still don't think every new multiplayer IP should be a free hand out. But if they want to position this game that way, it's fine, I guess? We still have no idea if they're compensating for anything.

PS2 has proven to be quite a struggle to emulate over the past 2 decades. Possibly more than the Saturn. I'd love to go back and enjoy some of those games in modern fashion, but there's still some nagging input lag issues with PCSX2 apparently. There's also some remastered stuff on the PS3 that never made it to PS4. Sly Cooper Collection comes to mind.

UE4 technically does now with Fortnite.