dillekant @ dillekant @slrpnk.net

Posts

9

Comments

135

Joined

2 yr. ago

The AI cores? I'm pretty sure they're for AI right?

Any game where the AI cores of modern GPUs are used for actual AI and not graphics.

Fair point, but having not read the comics, I can hardly copy them unless I pirate the original comics now can I. The author would probably be on board with me doing that.

He has denied their denial.

To reiterate, I do have respect for the view, but you actually stated the bit I find unrealistic:

There is the possibility that voting for a voice now means a treaty would lack political capital or public approval for decades to come because we already voted for a voice

I don't think the voice is an insufficient response to delay a sufficient one, and I do know what the insufficient response looks like. The reason is:

• This is driven from the statement from the heart. Having a voice is a driving force for the treaty, not a delay. It's also not a white person's consolation prize. The statement is softly spoken and expects slow and steady progress, which I believe is consistent with indigenous values.
• A no vote on a referendum is far more likely to stall out any progress on a treaty because it looks like a conservative no. This discussion isn't whether to hold a referendum (which is far greyer). It's what to vote for. To be even clearer regarding the unrealistic idea here imagine 80% of people were progressive no voters. In that state a no vote looks like a call for a treaty. But there aren't that many. Very generously progressive no maybe a bit above 10%. That just gets lost in the conservative no and will absolutely be used say Australia does not want a treaty.
• In no world is a voice worse than no voice. I agree with you that this sort of thing is often used to bait out a raw deal but that is not what's happening. You can kind of see it in the desperation from the conservative no. The total fabrications and language used. They do not want it because it's not a consolation prize.

More realistically, I think he's just betting that you can just reason down a no vote to a racist fact. IIUC the line of thinking from this video. I'm yet to hear a non-racist view of a (conservative) no vote.

The "progressive" no vote, I have some respect for, but I also don't think it's a mainstream view, nor is it actually reasonable. It expects some sort of magical thinking that not having a voice will somehow get us closer to a treaty.

Not every indigenous person needs to come to a consensus. The vast majority of community leaders have come up with a plan. Focusing on the minority of voices is really just rhetoric in place of an argument.

If you're not paying for it, you're the product.

Wait no... it seems like capitalists will charge for whatever they can get away with. Those bastards!

TIL for no tessellation on skeletal meshes. I hope over time Unreal / Epic will put some effort in on minimising memory usage, even though I know they "just" got done with Nanite and friends.

OK so this is now offtopic for the conversation, but...

However, that’s not the way artists traditionally work.

To some extent, it's authoring tools which affect how they work. A procedural materials pipeline can help them compose on top of already procedural content. In a way, you could see PBR as a part of that pipeline because PBR materials are physics modelled. Having said that I do take your point, even building out that pipeline takes time. Creating a PBR materials library is not super easy, and obviously organic stuff is very hard to model as a material.

meshes made up a significantly larger amount of RAM usage

From watching blender modelling, I thought the pattern was to have minimal rigging on the base mesh and then tesselation via normal maps + subdivision (apparently this is very doable even with sculpting). Obviously for animation you need a certain quality but beyond that I thought everything would be normal maps, reflection maps, etc etc.

who decided that it’s a good idea to have less RAM on the Series S than on the Series X…

Supply chains are complicated, and MS probably did their due diligence to ensure minimal blockages. From seeing the memory structures of newer video cards, I'm pretty sure there are supply constraints to memory to think of.

Honestly I think gamedevs leaning on memory this hard instead of compute is a mistake. You can have intelligently tiled, procedurally generated textures and have a lot more of them, but instead everyone is leaning on authored content on disc. This goes against industry trends in non-game rendering where procedural generation is the norm. If Doom Eternal can look that good with forward rendering, there are no excuses.

My main beef with the hate on the Series S is that both times it's been a big deal (BG3 and Halo Infinite), it has been split screen which has held back shipping. The community would be as justified going after split screen as they are going after the Series S.

I don't think anyone in these comments has worked in gamedev.

I don't think there are palette limitations, but many games are running on the Series S at SD with FSR upscaling to 1080P. Quality wise they do look acceptable. See Immportals of Aveum as an example

The S only has 10GB of RAM compared to 16 in the X,

Yes, and the Switch is an ARM based architecture, the 360 was a PowerPC. Architecturally, the S and the X are very similar. Your argument seems to be "The Series S is slower and has less RAM", which is true, but games should just scale properly. Lower res and lower framerate targets should work. They aren't working because the game probably doesn't scale across some critical axis. That's basically a bug and they should fix it.

I think it bothers people because they think that Series S is "holding back" Series X, which is simply not how it works. Fixing things fixes them everywhere. Series S makes Series X games run faster and better.

The Series S and X are extremely similar hardware wise. Games really just need to scale to fit the two targets. The real issue is that the games and game makers which MS owns largely use a lot more CPU power, which doesn't really scale down as easily as GPU power. Having a PC game maker act like a console game maker is the real gap in skillset, not the dual targets.

Gert er sterm derk.

If Rambo The Video Game (2014) was made with the tech of today, it would look much better while costing the devs the same amount of time.

I don't think this is quite correct. A while back devs were talking about a AAApocalypse. Basically as budgets keep on growing, having a game make its money back is exceedingly hard. This is why today's games need all sorts of monetisation, are always sequels, have low-risk game mechanics, and ship in half broken states. Regardless of the industry basically abandoning novel game engines to focus on Unreal (which is also a bad thing for other reasons), game production times are increasing, and the reason is that while some of the time is amortised, the greater graphical fidelity makes the lower fidelity work stand out. I believe an "indie" or even AA game could look better today for the same amount of effort than 10 years ago, but not a AAA game.

For example, you could not build Baldur's Gate 3 in Unreal. This is an unhealthy state for the industry to be in.

It's from a tweet. It's earnest. You can google the quote to get more context.

"I want shorter games with worse graphics made by people who are paid more to work less and I'm not kidding"

The 80 kph rule of thumb is actually part of the design parameters of most regular cars. They are built to be most fuel efficient at 80 (or probably more accurately aerodynamic designed for 80).

I was using exponential colloquially (and fair cop given its usage during Covid), but I think you're just using cubic as a rough guide also due to air resistance. I'd note there are no extra gears at the higher speeds, so you're probably less efficient on the tyres etc.

The faster you go above 80 you use exponentially more energy. Invest in public transport you knobs.