I'm pretty sure Microsoft will be developing software emulation layer for Windows ARM, so it can support backwards compatibility on as many kinds of ARM processors as possible. But since Snapdragon is only claiming that this works on the X Elite, it's either a matter of performance, or hardware restrictions?
To be fair, except for GOG, none of the games bought on digital stores are ever really yours. See the recent debacle about The Crew.
I wasn't calling out anyone on anything! I'm perfectly aware "1%" was a hyperbole, but I'm genuinely curious about crypto projects that aren't snake oil.
You f*d up at the part where you didn't start explaining in song, orchestra and all.
git: 'go' is not a git command. See 'git --help'.
The most similar command is
log
Any examples of the 1%? Outside of a few cryptocurrencies, I don't think I've ever seen a project self-identified as "crypto" that wasn't a con
Isn't it true specifically on Windows, because the Windows implementation of OpenGL is lacking, but false on Linux?
That is what surprises me with this announcement: we moved a while ago from a more powerful, limited number of cores to smaller, more numerous, and less consuming cores. Power consumption increases to the square of the frequency of the processor, so what is the advantage of moving away from that model?
Same: I got both Arkham Knight and The Witcher 3 with my 980! That's actually one of the reasons I bought one: I had planned to buy both games anyway, it made me "save" (as in, not spend) that much money. And given that it was NVIDIA's flagship at the time, it worked quite well with that GPU and I wouldn't have noticed the performance issues if I had not read so much backlash about them.
Off the top of my head:
- I don't remember which one, but one recent Resident Evil remaster. Must be 4, if you say so!
- As I mentioned, Warcraft III: Reforged was (is?) considered terrible
- The GTA III, GTA: Vice City and GTA: San Andreas remasters, which are pretty bad ports of the Android/iOS versions
- Batman: Return to Arkham
- Dark Souls: Remastered
- Metro 2033: Redux
- Halo: The MCC as well, although I heard that it got a lot better down the line
- Didn't some Final Fantasy recent remasters / new releases get criticized?
From what I recall, most of these were criticized for lacking the hand-crafted textures and lighting that the originals had. For obvious reasons, since most remasters are AI-enhanced textures, upgraded engines and little to no handcraft ever comes into play.
Did they actually fix the performance of AK or did we just get better hardware to run the game better?
They actually pulled it from Steam for a while, and re-released it properly a few weeks later. But yes, they ended up fixing it properly, and it's probably one of the best-looking games of its generation on PC. The photo mode, in particular, is stellar.
Good points, but a few of these are mixing up controversy with genuine critics.
- Arkham Knight's performance was terrible at launch. But many Ubisoft games could make this list, they were quite famous for their buggy games for some time.
- Along with the Diablo 2 remake, you could add the Warcraft 3 remaster as well which was nonetheless apparently abysmal, but which also removed the original game from Battle.NET. We may also add most remakes and remasters, it feels like an exception when a remaster is generally appreciated.
- Like Starfield, Fallout 4 was also heavily criticized at launch for the same reasons: unengaging story, always the same bugs, lackluster roleplay due to the voiced character... But maybe that's always the case with every new Bethesda game.
- If I remember correctly, on of the main issues with Alien: Colonial Marines wasn't so much that it was a terrible and unfinished game (which it was), but that the demo released was very engaging, and a completely unfair representation of the actual game, which was considered false advertising.
Some people managed to make it run on the SD, you may need to try the demo first. It's a shame that it's not supported officially, it's exactly the kind of games I enjoyed playing on the platform.
I would classify Soulslike as a subgenre of Metroidvanias, but sure. I also oversaw what is arguably the most characteristic characteristic in Soulslike games: the loss of all currency on death, with a possible retrieval.
It was a 3D Metroidvania, not really Soulslike IMO: the abilities unlocked as the game progresses that allow the player to explore places they couldn't go or take shortcuts they couldn't take are the staple of Metroidvanias, and so many people seem to forget it, but that rest to save / enemies respawn mechanic was in many Metroidvania games long before Dark Souls. I would also say that Souls-like games are characterized by their build variety and combat difficulty, which were notably absent from J:FO.
The videogameschronicle article is a cover of this Bloomberg article. Better read the source.
This is not an acceptable argument: I got Crazy Taxi and the first Desperados game in cereal boxes.
I didn't know Tom Zarek was a returning actor from the original BGS series! And the actor of Captain Apollo, no less.
The solution is install with apt.
I checked on my machine, and out of all the packages I had on snap, only Inkscape, VLC and Slack were also available on apt. Spotify, Whatsdesk (a WhatsApp client) and Signal were among the most commonly used missing.
Hello all,
I've been scratching my head with this for a while now, and some help would be greatly appreciated. My issue is that my monitor's native resolution (3440x1440) and refresh rates are not recognized by Ubuntu natively, whether I'm using Wayland or Xorg.
The monitor's EDID file contains a mode with the actual screen's resolution in DTD (Detailed Timing Descriptors) format, but neither Xorg nor Wayland seem to be able read it for some reason.
I've really tried a few things now, neither of which worked, so a few pointers would be greatly appreciated!
What works
Using X11 and manually setting xrandr's mode to the output of gtf 3440 1440 60. That's pretty much the only solution I've found to use the monitor's actual resolution so far.
What did not work
- Modifying the grub settings to set the video output to the same resolution/framerate as what works on X11
- Using the
edid-generatorto generate a custom EDID file using those same settings, and telling grub to take it into account. It was quite a pain to make it work by itself, and I have suspicions that it might not work because it was not built to accommodate resolutions not supported by EDID 1.3 (which are limited 16:10, 4:3, 5:4, 16:9). - Doing either of the two previous points using the settings from the EDID file (read from
edid-decode < /sys/class/drm/card0-DP-3/edid) - Unsurprisingly, trying to use xrandr to set the correct output to the Wayland monitor (XWAYLAND0)
- Some other stuff, probably not worth mentioning
Some other info
- Ubuntu 22.04
- Gnome 42.9
- X.org 1.21.1.4
- Mesa Intel Graphics (not a gaming rig, but the chip is able to manage a 3440x1440 output)
- Laptop: Tuxedo InfinityBook Pro Gen7 / monitor: DELL S3422DWG
Edit: the solution
@HeyLow@lemmy.blahaj.zone cracked it, the problem is from the dongle: I had tested the cable but never the dongle, obviously. Thank you all for your support!
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/2287056
> I feel like this is a question that might have been asked around and maybe there are guides around, but that's a discussion that I'd like to have with the lot of you. > > ## The context > > Using Linux on both my work laptop and the Steam Deck has made me quite interested in a full switch to Linux - my other computer is a gaming desktop, which I use a lot for many things, but mostly for gaming. Getting used to Linux has made me quite more intolerant to all the BS Microsoft is pushing than I used to be, the latest one being forcing the users to switch from the older email client to the new Outlook, which has a big, nice ad banner that looks like an unread email. So I've began wondering: after all, why not? Why shouldn't I embrace the penguin? Well, the answer is that I should not if there are too many hinders and drawbacks in using Linux, which would make me need a dual boot instead of a single OS install. > > We all know gaming has long been one of the main limiting factors in switching, but the Deck has changed the whole landscape on that front. We've basically switched from "Windows is the only OS suitable for gaming" to "Linux is also viable", and the Deck has been made that available to the general audience. Therefore, nowadays, how viable is Linux for a gaming computer? What are the limitations users will encounter? Would I be able to play all the games from my Steam, Epic and GOG library with a bit of tinkering, including the new releases? > > > ## The drawbacks of using Linux (or those that I can think of) > > 1. Other gaming launchers support on Linux suck: GOG and Epic will work through Heroic Games but Activision/Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA and Rockstar games will all be a pain, or even not work at all. Is is true? Is there any way around that? > 2. No Microsoft GamePass. Or none that actually matters, as the only solution is to pay for the higher tier and stream the games - so no game actually runs on the desktop. No, thanks. > 3. Some DRM will prevent games from working, and this is especially true for games with heavy online content. > 4. NVIDIA support for Linux is far from being on-par with that on Windows, especially the open-source drivers. Is this still true? > 5. Many devices, especially those for gaming, might not have good (or even working) compatibility drivers for Linux. I know my UWQHD monitor works flawlessly on Windows, but requires quite a bit of tinkering on Ubuntu > 6. Newer games might not be optimized for Linux in the first place > 7. Tinkering is inevitable (as with any Linux computer, really) > > What can we add? > > ## The advantages (I can think of) > > 1. It's free > 2. It's ad free > 3. Customization on Linux is awesome, and I might end up spending more time ricing, breaking it all and reinstalling than gaming (see also, previous section's 7.) > 4. I will no longer be sending data to Microsoft > > What else am I not thinking about? > > ## What distro? > > And finally, let's say I make the switch. What Linux distro should I use? I've read a bit about Drauger, Ubuntu GamePack, or even Pop! OS with some manual setup. What do you guys think, and advise?
I feel like this is a question that might have been asked around and maybe there are guides around, but that's a discussion that I'd like to have with the lot of you.
The context
Using Linux on both my work laptop and the Steam Deck has made me quite interested in a full switch to Linux - my other computer is a gaming desktop, which I use a lot for many things, but mostly for gaming. Getting used to Linux has made me quite more intolerant to all the BS Microsoft is pushing than I used to be, the latest one being forcing the users to switch from the older email client to the new Outlook, which has a big, nice ad banner that looks like an unread email. So I've began wondering: after all, why not? Why shouldn't I embrace the penguin? Well, the answer is that I should not if there are too many hinders and drawbacks in using Linux, which would make me need a dual boot instead of a single OS install.
We all know gaming has long been one of the main limiting factors in switching, but the Deck has changed the whole landscape on that front. We've basically switched from "Windows is the only OS suitable for gaming" to "Linux is also viable", and the Deck has been made that available to the general audience. Therefore, nowadays, how viable is Linux for a gaming computer? What are the limitations users will encounter? Would I be able to play all the games from my Steam, Epic and GOG library with a bit of tinkering, including the new releases?
The drawbacks of using Linux (or those that I can think of)
- Other gaming launchers support on Linux suck: GOG and Epic will work through Heroic Games but Activision/Blizzard, Ubisoft, EA and Rockstar games will all be a pain, or even not work at all. Is is true? Is there any way around that?
- No Microsoft GamePass. Or none that actually matters, as the only solution is to pay for the higher tier and stream the games - so no game actually runs on the desktop. No, thanks.
- Some DRM will prevent games from working, and this is especially true for games with heavy online content.
- NVIDIA support for Linux is far from being on-par with that on Windows, especially the open-source drivers. Is this still true?
- Many devices, especially those for gaming, might not have good (or even working) compatibility drivers for Linux. I know my UWQHD monitor works flawlessly on Windows, but requires quite a bit of tinkering on Ubuntu
- Newer games might not be optimized for Linux in the first place
- Tinkering is inevitable (as with any Linux computer, really)
What can we add?
The advantages (I can think of)
- It's free
- It's ad free
- Customization on Linux is awesome, and I might end up spending more time ricing, breaking it all and reinstalling than gaming (see also, previous section's 7.)
- I will no longer be sending data to Microsoft
What else am I not thinking about?
What distro?
And finally, let's say I make the switch. What Linux distro should I use? I've read a bit about Drauger, Ubuntu GamePack, or even Pop! OS with some manual setup. What do you guys think, and advise?
[https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/6ba90a8c-410f-49b4-9e0c-799616d30c88.png] After Mr Miracle (2017), Strange Adventures (2020) and One Bad Day: Riddler (2022), the Hugo-nominated duo Tom King and Mitch Gerads comes back with a retelling of one of the most famous comic books covers (if not stories) o...