legend

I have never heard of this artist before either. Old confirmed!

No worries. Now if you actually precisely remembered every personal detail I've ever shared... that might actually worry me

Lol in 2011; it's been a while! I've even posted a photo from it before!

Thanks for all the recommendations everyone

I agree that the fringe is amplified beyond its reality via social media, but I think we also have to be a little careful of dismissing occurrences as just the fringe. In 2014, people supporting Trump would have been labeled a fringe group, yet he went on to win the republican nomination and presidency. And while he got voted out of his second term, it was more than close enough that he could still potentially win it in the next term. The fringe on social media can turn into the typical.

Ah yeah that could be good. Looks like it might only be on the Uplay store?

Turns out my wife who doesn't game a lot really enjoys beat 'em up games (or at least cooping them with me). We got River City Girls this weekend and she loved it (especially since she loves anime and humor in games). From that, I also picked up Streets of Rage 4 and she's been enjoying that too! So now I'm looking for other good suggestions of modern coop beat 'em ups she might enjoy. Any recommendations? TMNT and River City Girls 2 are both coming out this summer which will be great, but I was wondering if there are other good ones out now that you all would recommend. I will add that games are very challenging without an easy mode are probably out because she's not an expert gamer.

Look, the bottom line is Elon sucks.

I'm not baffled because people enjoy different things. I'm baffled because it feels like a very "produced" game that's just looking for a money grab rather than crafting a game for its own sake.

I haven't played a single CoD since the very first Modern Warfare. It battles me that people still churn out money for this series year over year.

It turned out this was working at first, but then stopped working? I can't explain it, but by fucking around a lot, I finally managed to get Desktop Steam into Big Picture mode where I could finally look up the desktop controller bindings and think I found the problem. I own a Steam Controller (though I haven't used it much since Valve kind of stopped supporting it), and it was using my steam controller desktop bindings that it imported from my PC. Here's where it gets confusing. On my Steam Controller bindings, I set it up so that a light press on the trigger was left click while a full press was right click. On the original Steam Controller, this was very obvious because the triggers had mid-way level then you had to "click" through to activate a full pull. On the Steam Deck, there isn't this mid-level click and it looks like it counted a light press as *very* light on the Steam Deck such that it's hard to hit without registering a full press. I undid these settings and now it works!

Okay, first bad experience. Desktop mode is janky as fuck. I cannot left click at all. It's suppose to be clicking in the track pad, but nothing. I've run through every single button and none of them left click. I've seen similar reports of problems with it not working and restarting the device doesn't fix it. I don't have a USB C hub so I have no mouse I can plug in either.

For sure. To be clear, what I mean is it's obvious when a game supports noram Steam cloud saves: the steam page for it lists it in its features. But from what I can tell, there is no way to know whether they just support normal steam cloud save syncing, or also the new dynamic cloud sync feature Steam released to go hand-in-hand with Deck going into suspend mode and that you really need devs to adopt that feature to get the more seamless transition.

Yeah that's my understanding, though I haven't tested it yet. The problem with that though is it means it's tired to whatever normal save system the game has. So if the game has intermittent saving, you may lose progress, whereas with dynamic cloud sync, I think the goal is it's a special hook to pick up where you left off.

To give some early impressions, it's pretty awesome so far, but I haven't played anything on it that will tax it yet. Although the design always looked a bit tight, like others, I've found it to be an ergonomic device to hold and control, especially when stacked up to the history of other handhelds. (It's more comfortable that than Switch, for example, which is otherwise the first handheld I used that didn't nearly instantly cramp my hands.) I think the only slightly awkward bit is the bumpers are not as easy to hit in my natural grasp as every other button. The analogs also feel really good for a handheld and way better than the Switch nubs. I got a mid tier without the etched glass, so I can tell it has some glare, not too bad inside but it would probably be little annoying outside. Otherwise the screen looks great and feels pleasantly large. Using this gave me real flashbacks to my early days using a Game Gear (which obviously has a vastly smaller screen, but it felt big back then and that feeling persists here.) The speakers are awesome. It sounds louder and better than I expected a handheld's speakers to feel. The UI is pretty good. It wasn't hard to figure out which of my existing games are stamped with approval for the Deck and at least browsing the featured Deck games was pretty obvious and clear. You can also set filters of the different levels of support you'd be willing to accept, but it does feel like there could be a bit more work done here. I think the main thing I wish was more clear is which games will support Steam's new "Dynamic Cloud Sync" feature which lets you suspend on Deck and pick up exactly where you left off on PC. This feature would go a long way to giving the Deck a Switch like feel of shifting between the modes, but as far as I can tell, they don't disambiguate between cloud saves and this feature. If anyone knows how to tell, I'd love to know. Hopefully it gets adopted more in the future.

Most typically you don't really directly say "I want this on a hyperthread" you just say you want a thread and let the OS and CPU figure it out. Certainly, though, you can target only the number of full cores if you want to approximately have dedicated access.

Welcome

Unfortunately, still not easy! Ultimately, you're going to have to ask the game developer to interface with whatever threading design you make in the engine and it will remain a headache. Multi-threading is filled with gotchas even when you're calling out to a "nice" multi-threaded API. The reason I brought up Rust is because the language's very strict memory ownership model basically prevents you from compiling if your code might have a thread synchronization issue (unless you deliberately mark something as unsafe) and only through that kind of hard guarantee have I found multi-threaded complexity start to become manageable. Even then, there are still lots of considerations. To be clear, they can (and I believe do) silo very different compute jobs to different threads. But lets say they do that for 5 different kinds of engine jobs. If that's all you're able to do, then having a 6 core system isn't going to gain you anything because you're only using 5 threads. What you really want is to be able to take a piece of code and have it *arbitrarily* be split among different threads. When you have that kind of task, that's when you'll really see the gains from increasing your core count, because you can make use of it immediately. But doing that is hard, at least for the kinds of things the CPU does. There are plenty of game engine tasks that can easily scale that way, but those tasks are typically handled by the GPU which is designed to be better at them. The tasks you don't want to do on a GPU that benefit from being run on the CPU, tend to have a hard time being able to arbitrarily scale to available cores. Usually, it's just a pre-determined number of jobs that you declare in advance and know don't have to communicate and synchronize with each other in complex ways.

Generally speaking, yes. While I'm not a game dev, games have to do a lot of frequent synchronization and I can absolutely imagine this meaning a massive headache with multi-threading. I suspect it's still a lot easier to silo very different compute jobs to different threads than it is to scale a single task across it and that means limited utilization of multi-threading. Mini-rant: C++, which most big games are written in, isn't great for multi-threading either. I mean, it certainly has all the performance potential, but as a language you can easily shoot yourself in the foot. If games ever started to switch to using Rust that might become a bit easier, but that is a huge ask and not likely to happen any time soon.

The first one kinda feels like a proof of concept but is fun. The second, Dragonfall, is really excellent with a very engaging story. The third, Hong Kong, is good, but I don't think quite reached the heights of Dragonfall. It's been a long time though; the games are old! Hopefully though, this means they're going to be brining the series back.

Just got the confirmation for my mid range in!

That fact, regardless of how true, seems much more suggestive of shenanigans of speculation, rather than art appreciation, because you don't need to spend millions on a publicly available digital piece of art. No, the NFT scene is just plain bad The technology is a solution looking for a problem that carries a ton of baggage. I have yet to think of a problem where a blockchain is actually an appropriate solution. By all means, lets use more cryptographic technologies, but lets burn the blockchain to the ground. The worst future is tech bros continue to push it into everything and everything gets less efficient and brittle. That goes for proof of work and the other "efficient" consensus methods of these permissionless time-stamping systems.

If I were an artist I would have such mixed feelings about NFTs. On the one hand, if you can sucker some of these people out of some money while this lasts, it can't hurt to have more cash. On the other hand, the whole notion of NFTs is so antithetical to the point of art it would be infuriating. Not that the art world hasn't had a history of the economics being at odds with it goals, but NFTs elevate that scumminess to such an incredible level. It quadruples down on the worst aspects of the community. (This is not to say that all economics is incompatible with the goals of art, only the degradation into its value being purely about speculation rather than subjective value)

What a bunch of thugs.