🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 05:10:55 GMT, john...@frontier.com (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 10:25:58 -0500, Rin Stowleigh
><rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 01:16:25 GMT, john...@frontier.com (John Lewis)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 13:39:10 -0500, Rin Stowleigh
>>><rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>This is quite possibly one of the most idiotic things to happen in PC
>>>>gaming in a couple of decades.
>>>>
>>>>http://www.technobuffalo.com/2015/11/10/fallout-4-framerate-capped-and-tied-to-game-speed/
>>>>
>>>>Once upon a time, the timing of games and the frame rate were tied to
>>>>the actual speed of the CPU.  Like, approximately 35 years ago when
>>>>the developer of a game for a given computer only needed to test their
>>>>game on a computer for which there was only one CPU available for.
>>>>
>>>>So, for example an early PC I owned had a chip that was twice the
>>>>clock speed of the original IBM PC.  Running games written for the IBM
>>>>PC ran rediculously fast (which was good for something like a turn
>>>>based game which was not timing sensitive, but was a problem for an
>>>>action game which would in essence become twice as difficult by
>>>>playing on the faster chip).  So, a lot of times I used a utility that
>>>>would in essence force the game to run at the proper speed (or at
>>>>least close enough to it).
>>>>
>>>>However, Bethesda seems to have been practicing at one point for a
>>>>real nuclear war, because they seem to have shoved their heads so far
>>>>up their own asses that they have become oblivious to the advancements
>>>>of chip technology since the early 80s.  
>>>>
>>>>You might be wondering how I came across this.  Well long story short
>>>>there is a nasty bug that exists when hacking/using terminals at
>>>>higher framerates.  More times than not, the player just becomes stuck
>>>>when they exit the terminal hacking mode; stuck as in cannot move,
>>>>must reload a quicksave.  Not a problem if you don't really need the
>>>>terminal access to advance, but there are some places where it is
>>>>required to complete a quest milestone.  So, I was looking around at
>>>>options and fixes.  Apparently this is some sort of built-in bug that
>>>>Bethesda added to penalize folks with real computers for having decent
>>>>hardware -- I guess they would prefer we just said fuck it and bought
>>>>the console version instead?
>>>>
>>>>If you want to read about possible fixes for the stuck at terminal
>>>>bug, just google "fallout 4 terminal hacking bug".
>>>>
>>>>Bethesda's apparent solution to GSYNC monitors is to have a locked
>>>>72hz vsync'ed mode!  And, if you're used to real gaming, playing at
>>>>that feels like youre playing with your optical mouse sitting in a
>>>>bowl of peanut butter.
>>>>
>>>>GSYNC is one of those technologies that in itself is pretty much
>>>>flawless.  You don't have to do much and it just works.  In fact, you
>>>>have to work pretty hard to fuck it up.  Bethesda apparently put in
>>>>the man hours to do just that, because they fucked it up royally in
>>>>this game.  Nice job, morons.
>>>
>>>Rin,
>>>
>>>Thanks so much for the warning !!
>>>
>>>A console port hacked for the PC. Thanks for lowering your standards
>>>BethSoft... NOT !!
>>>
>>>Anyway, I am so glad that I did not purchase Fallout 4. Maybe by the
>>>the time the PC version of the GOTY comes out (at a reasonable sale
>>>price, of course), then BethSoft might have removed their heads from
>>>their collective a**es.... 
>>>
>>>Yes, I also have GSync and it had better work properly with GSync,
>>>maxing out with Vsync off at my chosen default frame-rate... otherwise
>>>I will very happy to give it as miss.
>>>
>>>John Lewis
>>
>>Yes to picking it up at a discount.  
>>
>>I ended up just accepting the stupid 72hz bullshit for now.  Turning
>>off vsync entirely is an experiment that shows you how smooth the game
>>COULD feel on a high end rig.  Ever seen the lock pick animation
>>running at two or three thousand frames per second?  Kind of funny how
>>fast that lock can turn ;)
>>
>>Being the adaptable kind of guy I am I just sort of got used to the
>>72hz, accept the games flaws and enjoy it.  And there is definitely
>>fun to be had, I find myself going back to it when I have time.
>>
>>Only a few more days until R6:Siege comes out though, which will take
>>all my game time for a while.  I have a feeling Ubisoft is going to
>>experience a cash windfall for this game, especially coming right on
>>the heels of the attacks in Paris.
>>
>
>And with Ubisoft being a French company too.... I'm sure Giles
>Guillemot will be happy with the rattle from his cash can....

>From playing beta1 and 2 (something I rarely do), the rattle will be
well-deserved at least for fans of tactical multi-player games.  The
game itself seems to be great even in early form, but its greatness
might be defined by the deployed business model.  

They made committments early on for ongoing map releases and content,
where there would be no additional charges for the maps themselves
(this is critical, because if not everyone has the same maps in their
collection it makes matchmaking difficult).  Yet, they are already
offering some sort of screwy seasons pass for $30 that is literally
that, a one-year membership to something that as far as I can tell
buys only cosmetic upgrades, earlier access to new operators (kind of
like loadouts or a character class.. each operator type has different
abilities),  and a slightly faster XP gain.

Hope they don't let screwy business decisions fuck up a solid game.