TheAceOfSkulls

I’m not going to say that Ubisoft’s missteps have led to me figuring out a lot about my resolution issues, because the truth is they still don’t support the resolutions I just figured out how to use.

Tomorrow I’ll go into the BIOS of my computer and I’ll probably figure out i’ve got all the wrong settings on for my CPU which is why it’s running so hot.

Wellllll… I just figured out why I had to crank the brightness to max on all my games for the past couple of years.

I really wish I’d known about the color temperature thing on my TV earlier. Maybe I would have actually been able to see shit in Destiny

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I am the dumbest mother fucker

Just decided to test to see if I could edit settings on my TV.

Apparently setting it to 1920x1080 was changing the color setting from Normal to Warm.

Okay, now to fix the text problem and I’ll be back in with the PC master race crowd

1920x1080?

Yeah, whenever I try that, despite the TV supporting it and my computer telling me it’s recommended, my colors go all weird (white turns to aged 1950s appliance cream color), my text size goes to shit, and the bounds of my screen fly out into the void beyond my monitor’s limits.

It’s… fun.

For those wondering, I don’t actually have much of an opinion on resolution sizes. I know technically you can get more detail out of higher sizes, but that’s about as far as my understanding goes.

Hell, I’ve been struggling with getting the right size on my monitor for awhile now (though that might be me stubbornly refusing to use an actual monitor and opting for a TV instead, and dealing with the woes of HDMI fiddling).

However, I’d much rather have a smoother, better FPS game than one with better resolutions from what I’ve seen and played.

Okay here’s the comparison:

A film wants you to look at the dragon and the hero fighting it. It wants you to see ever stroke of the blade and every movement of the tail. That being said, it focuses on the action in motion, so motion blur occurs regularly, letting you see the movement even more. Then it goes for a clear shot, which is normally why action scenes are directed with pauses in motion.

This is also why the Transformers series by Michael Bay is a crowded clusterfuck, as it neglects a lot of the clear shots of miniaturized “quiet time" in the middle of an action sequence (one lasting long enough for you to understand the implications, but not long enough to disengage you from the action and reflect upon the entire experience, as is the usual case with quiet time). In addition, the high level of detail of the giant robots doesn’t help demonstrate motion very well, as we can see with motion blur that less detail often helps showcase it better

Meanwhile, take the dragon fighting scene in games. Motion blur is confusing here, as it obscures details, and details are often used for telegraphing attacks or identifying weaknesses or vulnerabilities (both for yourself and the dragon). It’s more important to know where the dragon’s tail is rather than where it is headed, as you need to constantly process information and use it.

A game relies on input and your inputs are often informed by what you see on screen. You need to know where your hero is when fighting that dragon, what your hero is doing, where the dragon is and what it is doing, as well as the environment and any information like health or inventory.

You’re not supposed to have time to think about how close a hit was or how powerful a flame is, as that is more information to juggle in a tense, fast paced battle.

A cinematic look tells a story, but doesn’t work well for being a part of it.

heisenburger:

micdotcom:

For $50, this tiny box will keep everything you do online anonymous

From National Security Agency spying to governments blocking portions of the Internet in times of unrest, recent controversies have demonstrated just how little freedom we actually have online
But what if there were a way to stay hidden 24/7 on the Internet, free from detection and censorship?
Meet this new Kickstarter project, anonabox | Follow @micdotcom


THIS IS INSECURE. DO NOT BACK THIS. The hardware is an off-the-shelf alibaba product that’s $20 a unit. The box’s root password has been easily cracked. The wireless SSHD is the same for every box, allowing one owner to easily attack other owners of the box. Worse still, it’s being marketed to protestors, journalists and whilsteblowers as a secure device, when actually it’s pea-brained configuration of tor that in some ways makes it easier to attack than if you were connected to a public wireless network. The creator of this device has lied about every stage of it’s inception and purpose.Wired did a good writeup of the discoveries here: http://www.wired.com/2014/10/anonabox-backlash/

heisenburger:

micdotcom:

For $50, this tiny box will keep everything you do online anonymous

From National Security Agency spying to governments blocking portions of the Internet in times of unrest, recent controversies have demonstrated just how little freedom we actually have online

But what if there were a way to stay hidden 24/7 on the Internet, free from detection and censorship?

Meet this new Kickstarter project, anonabox | Follow @micdotcom

THIS IS INSECURE. DO NOT BACK THIS. The hardware is an off-the-shelf alibaba product that’s $20 a unit. The box’s root password has been easily cracked. The wireless SSHD is the same for every box, allowing one owner to easily attack other owners of the box. Worse still, it’s being marketed to protestors, journalists and whilsteblowers as a secure device, when actually it’s pea-brained configuration of tor that in some ways makes it easier to attack than if you were connected to a public wireless network. The creator of this device has lied about every stage of it’s inception and purpose.

Wired did a good writeup of the discoveries here: http://www.wired.com/2014/10/anonabox-backlash/

Okay, but to get back on subject, for those of you that don’t really know much about it

60 frames per second means that a game displays more animations in a single moment, and that it’s able to handle motion better.

I’m not here to go into all the details about this, but it means that there is much smoother animations occurring, much less little problems happening when movement occurs (ever rotate a camera in a game and notice the screen tears a bit?), and that the animations happen closer to real time inputs.

As for why “cinematic look” is lost at higher frame rates, it’s the same reason that those TVs in stores seem to be moving so much faster when playing a movie. Film is often shot to accentuate action, while games are done so that the action moves fluidly due to the fact that ideally there should be no player downtime.

Thus, for a film, an industry that loves its slowmo, having this heavier feel to it often helps it out, as movies are shot with methods that make use of this look. Meanwhile, games, which started out far from pretty and more about movement benefit more from higher framerates.

So there’s the reason games look better on a high end PC where the cutscenes are now flowing a bit quicker but your movies look terrible on high end TVs.

funquisitor:

queenqueso said: ……………?

It’s not the exact quote but here’s what the creative director said

The news of a 30 frames per second cap on the game was excused by creative director Alex Amancio as being ‘more cinematic' than 60 frames per second during an interview with IGN. As part of the same interview, level designer Nicolas Guérin added that 'you don’t gain that much from 60 fps, and it doesn’t look like the real thing - it’s a bit like The Hobbit movie, it looked really weird.

Alex Amancio also chimed in that 30 fps “feels more cinematic” and that “it actually feels better for people when it’s at 30 fps.”

now I don’t care about it *being* 30FPS I mean whatever but the fact they’re both saying it’s better is like ???? lmao ok??? no?

(you can read about it here)

I absolutely care about it being 30FPS on a next gen console.

With graphics out the window in terms of making bold leaps, the focus should be on using that hardware to make AAA games feel as good as they look.

Lying to your customers and trying to convince them that having less laggy games, games with better quality animations, and games that simply respond better to your inputs is somehow a worse experience is classic Ubisoft at this point, where they’ll rush to cash their check based off of hype and name recognition over releasing a good product any day of the week.

This company deserves to die already

It is a leader in the AAA industry and it’s vehemently anti-consumer and it bears the risk of helping to fuel these trends elsewhere in the industry. I’m not making a hyperbole here. Ubisoft has become poisonous both in terms of what it is doing to its own franchises and what it stands to do to gaming in general, and the entire flop that has been this prerelease of Assassin’s Creed Unity has pretty much convinced me to actually stop buying anything from them.

This is the company that pushed to see next gen consoles being adopted then immediately backpedaled so they could grab last gen cash. This crippled the WiiU on its first year (Rayman Legends), and hurt the shit out of the PS4 and Xbox One when the big games they were hyping as next gen (Watch Dogs and Assassin’s Creed 4) turned out to be current gen that looked slightly prettier on the new consoles.

This company looked at Far Cry 3’s success and ordered a dev cycle similar to Assassin’s Creed in order to milk it.

This is a company that has homogenized their games, preventing a lot of creative expression and direction within a huge section of the AAA market.

Meanwhile, they’ve been treating PC like crap for years now, with horrible DRM, locking away performance options on a regular basis, and releasing these subpar ports after consoles have already gotten them. Nice to see them respecting their player base, right?

It’s no wonder this company keeps spawning controversy. It’s a focus testing, “safe”, backpedaling, anti-consumer piece of shit that is the prime example of the worst parts of the game industry