SmoothIsFast

@SmoothIsFast@citizensgaming.com

This is a remote user, information on this page may be incomplete. View at Source ↗

⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Pavlov's conditioning⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

A progressive society does not need to retroactively change history, it can accept the imperfections of the past in the knowledge that we’ve already changed.

How is pointing out the heinous shit changing history? If anything, it’s accepting the imperfections of the past and acknowledging we have changed by calling out the callousness of its prior implementation and calling out what to avoid… you are literally contradicting yourself.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
Thanks, fixed!
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

Single player games rarely need or demand “continued support” and player numbers aren’t indicative of that

Sure maybe if the gaming industry didn’t constantly release buggy broken messes. But alas that’s not the world we live in and is very much a metric I care about to know whether or not a game is going to become abandonware or at least have community support if the developer won’t. These metrics allow that community or developer to understand if there is a player base which would benefit or a market to keep selling to. So yes they add value for players.

Single player player numbers aren’t indicative about things getting a sequel, low player count games get sequels, high player count games don’t get sequels. It has no direct bearing.

They very much are if the game is single player based. Acting as if demand is not a reason for games to get sequels or the budgets which come from player sales is not relevant is completely naive. Yes companies can run into financial hardships, get acquired and all manner of other circumstances that can lead to development being stopped whether there was an active player base or not. That’s not what these metrics represent and can give you an idea of what ip might get cut if a studio is acquired. They are useful and helpful, and I like to see those counts for my own understanding.

If you want to check if there are guides you can just Google it, it’s a lot more useful to just Google it. Then you’ll actually know instead of guessing.

Sure that used to work before SEO has killed search results, it’s quicker to check a player count on steam then to wade through garbage ai generated articles to find out if there is an active community following the game. It’s not a guess either if there are many people playing then there will be demand for content on YouTube or other platforms which means I can find guides.

Knowing single player, player counts is really just for vague curiosity. There’s no real use to it.

The only reason to hide it is to trick users to get abandon ware games or obscure how bad a game is doing. Keeping those stats up gives you valuable information, as I have pointed out. You are arguing in bad faith here and I honestly don’t know why unless you have some gatcha game on steam that you want to hide player stats on to hopefully drive some sales which is disingenuous.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
Sure you do, is it going to get continued support do to a big enough player base? Is the game gonna get a sequel from its popularity? Are there plenty of guides out do to the player count?

There is definetly more nuance to showing player numbers ffs.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
Correct but that screen real-estate isn’t the biggest issue as you generally have the phone and controller fairly close to your eyes, at an optimal viewing distance. Plus, I can stream up to 4k on my device or 1080p at 120fps if I wanted to stream from my pc. Think monitor vs TV gaming. Viewing distance is much more important than screen size on its own.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
The thing is they are only targeting that small market for PS5 gamers, they don’t want to compete in the handheld market and possibly loose those customers who would be happy with just a ps5 remote play experience vs a better more expensive device. I get it, they don’t have to have as many competitors and it makes it slightly cheaper versus the non dedicated competitors giving them a niche area to sell to.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
I mean it’s an 8in 1080p touch screen display at 60hz, the panel is probably around $60, the hardware is probably like a pi zero so $20, and a controller $70. So just on hardware this is probably around $120 after taking into account supply chain discounts. Then, manufacturing costs, and they probably don’t even have that high of a profit margin on the device. Add in a $100 for the actually chip set and yeah you get more features but it’s not that crazy imo. Just a niche market for sure.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
It’s just a $200 pro controller with a screen. I don’t think it’s gonna have a massive market, but for what it is, it’s not entirely terrible. Not everyone has a phone with a large screen so upgrading to a $1k phone is not a move they can make, but $200 for what’s basically an extra controller with an 8in display is not terrible just very niche.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
They do sell like $5 phone clips for controllers now a days as some mobile games are adding more controller support. But if for you an extra inch or two of screen real estate for the display is worth $200 then that’s your position, it just seems like the market share for that will be pretty damn niche. Like the nvidia shield I don’t expect it to be around for to long so if you do want this you better get one while they make em but know once the ps5 is done support for this will die out as well.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨PlayStation Portal review: impressive hardware but is Remote Play itself good enough?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
My phone is nearly a 7in screen, I could Bluetooth connect a Playstation controller and have the exact same functionality, using the hardware I already have. I get that if you don’t have a phone with a bigger screen then this becomes more of a proposition as getting a newer device with a larger screen is gonna be north of $1k USD, so spending $200 to get a portable display and extra controller in a sense is not that bad value wise. I do see where people are seeing it being wasteful as other devices are capable just not at the same level, the only thing I’m wondering is how big is the market of people who wouldn’t rather get a $5 phone holder for their ps5 controller and just use their phone. I see a couple people in this thread here but if most realized they could get a similar experience for $5 for a plastic phone clip would this really look as enticing?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The Steam Deck's budget price tag is the reason I still rate it nearly two years on⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

A console cannot be called a PC or replace a PC. It is a lesser category of product.

They can and are, lol, the definition for PC is surrounding the hardware. Whether or not the producer of said hardware has included software locks or hardware locks to prevent you from modifying the operating system on the device does not change that distinction, it only provides justification for closed ecosystems and locking down hardware a consumer has purchased, creating a monopoly over what that hardware can access. Hence why you are being called out for supporting said practices whether you set out with that intention or not. All of the devices you called out run on standard architectures for their computing resources which have drivers and kernels built in more than a couple operating systems already. If the software or hardware locks were not there, these devices would be capable of fitting into the narrowly scoped definition of PC you crafted. As others have pointed out the first gen switch can be loaded with Linux, as can a newer switch once you bypass the hardware lock. As can the ATM which runs windows server. Xboxs/Play Stations could run linux or windows as we have kernels built for ARM architecture, yet they are locked down. Allowing companies to redefine their devices allows them to skirt antitrust laws and parroting those same talking points only serves to reduce your ability to use/recycle hardware you have previously purchased.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The Steam Deck's budget price tag is the reason I still rate it nearly two years on⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
You are a fucking idiot lmaooo, at least it’s entertaining seeing you properly roasted for your clear fucking misunderstandings and defence of closed down personal computing hardware. Bravo I’m sure some Nintendo corporate stooge is smiling at you for justifying locking down bought hardware to a closed ecosystem with outrageous prices for games. Why the fuck are you even using federated social media if you love locked down controlled ecosystems?