Hazzard

100%. I literally bought Echoes of Wisdom on Switch day one, dumped it, and played it in Ryujinx, installing mods to increase settings.

I have the money, and am willing to part with it, but prefer a PC Quality experience. Heck, I'd even pay more for a PC version that didn't have shader stutter and had real PC options.

That said.... I don't expect it. Nintendo is very stuck in their ways, which has pros and cons. On the one hand, we're getting good traditional game design, no layoffs, and no micro transactions, which is wonderful. On the other, we're getting outdated hardware that's just powerful enough to support their game design ideas (although we're even seeing the cracks there now), and a diehard dedication to the old console exclusivity model.

Eh, not much nefarious you can do by pushing data around. Taking a lot of CPU/GPU usage? Certainly, you can do a lot of evil with distributed computing. But bandwidth?

Costs a lot to host all that data to push to people, and to handle streaming it to so many as well, all for them to just... throw it out? Users certainly don't keep enough storage to even store a constant 100Mb/s of sneaky evil data, let alone do any compute with it, because the game's CPU/GPU usage isn't particularly out of the ordinary.

So not much you could do here. Ockham's razor here just says... planes are fast, MSFS is a high fidelity game, they've gotta load a lot of high accuracy data very quickly and probably can't spare the CPU for terribly complicated decompression.

100%. I'm also honestly a bit worried about any remaster they may announce. Bluepoint did a wonderful job in many areas with Demon Souls, but there were definitely some "enhancements" that didn't exactly match the authorial intent of the original.

Ideal world, I'd love both, good access to a high quality original, and a top-tier remaster of a classic.

Fortunately ShadPS4 looks to be saving the day here, by giving us the ability to emulate the original with patches to fix the glaring issues. Still sucks if you're sitting there on PlayStation though.

All that said, I don't expect anyone to touch the original officially. From Soft have moved on, and Sony holds the publishing rights. If BluePoint isn't interested, it'll continue to be the elephant in the room.

Eh, it's because of what Bloodborne is, and the state of it. Improper frame pacing with a 30FPS cap, even if you bought a new PS5 to play it (because it's not available on PS4).

A cleaned up patch for newer gen hardware to unlock it would be enough, but a remaster is more likely to appeal to Sony.

Agreed, the way they can preserve the position of any object, anywhere, with thousands of objects and an obscenely large world, is exceedingly impressive.

What I don't get is why the hell any of that is a priority. It's a neat party trick, but surely 99.9% of the gameplay value of arranging items for fun could be achieved on the player ship alone.

Like... it's neat that I can pick up, interact with, and sell every single pen and fork on every table. But is it useful, with a carry weight system deincentivizing that? Fussing with my inventory to find what random crap I accidentally picked up that's taking up my weight? Is that remarkably better than having a few key obvious and useful pickups? Is it worth giving up 60FPS on console, and having dedicated loading screens for nearly every door and ladder around?

Again, it's cool that they have this massive procedurally generated world, that a player could spend thousands of hours in. But when that area is boring, does it really beat a handcrafted interesting world and narrative? What good is thousands of hours of content when players are bored and gone before 10 hours?

So like... from a tech perspective, I respect what Starfield is, and it's very impressive, but as a game it feels like a waste of a lot of very talented work, suffering from a lack of good direction at the top.

I think it is a problem. Maybe not for people like us, that understand the concept and its limitations, but "formal reasoning" is exactly how this technology is being pitched to the masses. "Take a picture of your homework and OpenAI will solve it", "have it reply to your emails", "have it write code for you". All reasoning-heavy tasks.

On top of that, Google/Bing have it answering user questions directly, it's commonly pitched as a "tutor", or an "assistant", the OpenAI API is being shoved everywhere under the sun for anything you can imagine for all kinds of tasks, and nobody is attempting to clarify it's weaknesses in their marketing.

As it becomes more and more common, more and more users who don't understand it's fundamentally incapable of reliably doing these things will crop up.

30% / 0% / 70%

Dang, this full out fooled me. Concerning, I guess we're here now. Lots to catch once you're aware of it, but totally passed by me while scrolling, even as someone who's well aware of AI Image Generation, even in an image that's intentionally ridiculous.

Honestly, makes sense, the active voice version is just... more efficient and easier to parse quickly.

Yeah, this is the problem with frankensteining two systems together. Giving an LLM a prompt, and giving it a module that can interpret images for it, leads to this.

The image parser goes "a crossword, with the following hints", when what the AI needs to do the job is an actual understanding of the grid. If one singular system understood both images and text, it could hypothetically understand the task well enough to fetch the information it needed from the image. But LLMs aren't really an approach to any true "intelligence", so they'll forever be unable to do that as one piece.

Yeah, I don't think the idea is a total non-starter, but I'd definitely like some details. How will this be limited to ensure it's not being used by investors and house flippers? How will this be ramped down once the housing market settles to avoid it being permanently "priced in"? How will this be paid for and how much will it cost?

Unfortunately American political debates right now are more of a pissing contest about rally turnout than they are about actual policy details, because that's what sways the voters on the fence for some reason.

Honestly I really don't think that's effective either. Giving people more money to buy something generally just means the market will respond by charging more money for that thing. The assistance will effectively get "priced in" given time.

It's honestly the weakest part of the Harris/Walz platform for me. Trump plan is utterly insane top-to-bottom though, and they're just using immigration as a scapegoat here, which is... something.