Re: Not sure about the structure but..
Yeah, you are right, sorry. They should put the Cobalt back in.
60 posts • joined 17 Oct 2012
Removal of Cobalt from the batteries is a good move given that a lot of it's sourcing isn't ethical (child labour, etc). I guess a big point of that wasn't made since that would be admitting that they were okay with the ethical issues sourcing it until something cheaper came along or it got more expensive to continue to use it.
This is just a scrap between 2 large corps that both have the utmost contempt for their users.
That said I have no real like for Apple and their iCrap but you only have to consider that Epic is actually owned by Tencent, look into their conduct within the pc gaming space of late and you soon realise this is a case they don't deserve to win. They have been the very definition of anti-consumer in so many ways over the last couple of years from re-igniting exclusivity deals in the pc games space (many of which were games that were funded via Kickstarter and promised on steam and/or DRM free only to later then be Epic store exclusive) to their actual Epic store application stealing and sending users machine data.
It seems to me that the 30% cost that Apple charge is the cost of access to their market of Apple devices. If you don't think that cost is worth it then you are free to not list it on that store but as we all know Epic has been making millions from being on that store, the store that they didn't help build, to deliver their product to devices that they didn't help build. You could argue the cost of the phones already covered that investment and it probably did. It's interesting that Epic made this change both on Google play and Apple's store at the same time, but the lawsuit is only against Apple. I think this is because they believe they can get a win against apple and then force Google to comply with the same ruling. If they took this up against Google as well or instead of then they would have to explain why users can't just install the APK and not use the store.
I’ve got no love for either of them, I’d happily see both companies knocked down a few pegs.
I picked up a rift when the price dropped to around the 400 mark (easy for me as I already have a relatively high-end gaming PC) and I really enjoy using it, as do the family. The main issues I have with it are having to move my PC downstairs, clear room for it and setting the sensors up. The other problem remains the lack of content, there are some games I’ve really enjoyed (Superhot VR, Beat Saber, Pavlov VR, Arizona Sunshine, RoboRecall, I Expect You to Die) but they all suffer with various issues. I think VR still has a long way to go with myriad problems but I’m not entirely sure that cost is the primary one, I think if it delivered better in these other aspects the value proposition would be better. I've also used a PSVR and VIVE, for the price the PSVR is excellent as the experience is basically the same and Sony are doing an excellent job of ensuring there are quality titles for it.
W10 seems to be working fine on my machine which is more than can be said for 7 and 8 on release (yes, my machine is that old). I've noticed a couple of glitches with the sound controls but realtek and my soundcard (Asus Xonar) have never played nicely with each other and the install of W10 seems to have re-set the way i had it set up on 8.1 so i can probably sort that out.
I have to agree with this post nearly entirely. The game itself is okay, there are some tweaks you can make floating about on the web to turn the mouse acceleration off by altering your config files but this should be in the menus really..
I also have to agree about the frame rate issues, this may be worth waiting for it to be patched. I am running nearly the same setup as above, i7 930 @ 4GHz, 6GB Ram but I have a Sapphire 7970 Dual-X OC graphics card with the 3GB required for the ultra textures. I can run the game at ultra and it seems fine at about 45 fps average but the moment you drive it really suffers ranging from 25 - 40 fps and with periodic dips to 10-12 fps it renders the game unplayable.
The problem is entirely remedied by switching to High textures and the game doesn't actually look that much different on this setting anyway. It's just frustrating that this seems to be more of an optimisation problem on the developers side than an issue with the hardware I am running. The game itself is still quite fun.
Also as I've just read above, the minimum spec for the game is 4GB, not 6GB and the recommended spec is 8GB. I've not seen the game use anything near the 6GB I have so I'm not sure why it would be an issue.
I purchased a motherboard (actually the components for an entire computer) from them a few years ago because they were cheaper than the company I normally use. There was something wrong with the motherboard that to this day i still don't understand, it kept rebooting the machine intermittently. I diagnosed it by replacing every other bit except that which obviously took time but it transpired that the motherboard was faulty from day 1, obviously at this point eBuyer dragged their heels over taking it back. I think in the end they dragged it out for the better part of a year before finally refunding the money (i posted it back to them with a note explaining the issue after they refused to take it back the nth time...). I'll never use them again and to this day I’ve stuck to that. I'd rather pay more to not have to deal with that crap when something does go wrong.
I find myself annoyed in the same way. I was glad to see the back of the start button and now they are putting it back. I would hope there is some way to disable and remove it again because it's just wasted space. For the rare times i have to venture into the start menu there is a frikken button for it, right there on my keyboard... 2 of them in fact!
Do people not pin most things to the taskbar anyway? I do on my home and work machines (Win 8 and 7), between that and win + R i never click the start menu. I think i've opened it maybe once today... Maybe... Honestly if they removed the run dialog i could understand all the annoyance but a useless, hard to navigate, menu? Nope, no complaints here.
They've been crapping all over PC gamers for the better part of the last few years at least. Sadly, i do own lots of games made by Ubisoft.. HAWX, HAWX 2, All the splinter cells, a couple of assassin creed games and all the rainbow 6 games since Ravenshield. Sadly of all those games HAWX, HAWX 2 and both the newest rainbow six games are completely rubbish. The multiplayer for HAWX (the reason i bought them) is completely and totally awful, to the extent that i can't and never have been able to actually join a server, i have the same issues with RS Vegas and Vegas 2, the co-op just flat out doesn't work. How a game can have so many problems with connectivity (Even when the machine is in the DMZ, sigh) is completely beyond me. The input lag when playing HAWX normally is awful to the point of being unplayable, ever tried flying a jet in a game with about 0.75 of a second input lag between mouse and movement on the screen? It's fun for all of about 5 seconds... And this isn't just my machine, 4GHz OC i7 with a 7970HD, yeah, no.
And now we have this hacking thing, very frikken tedious. Ubisoft have just slid from marginally better than EA in my books to being right up there with them, useless bunch of idiots. Ruining gaming as best they can. It's about time they just vanished to be honest.
Yeah, i agree, that makes sense but anyone who remembers the start of Steam knows it didn't start that way. Is this to suggest that we are willing to part with rights for a price? By the same logic the only thing MS did was price it wrong, i suspect not many people agree that's the main issue here, so whilst that is part of the reason i really don't think it's all of it or that simple. hmmmm....
"You may think it is crazy but the many millions, if not billions, of people who have already locked themselves into such systems obviously don't (Apple, Amazon, Google, Steam, etc. all sell content in a similar manner). The key difference is that none of those existing markets (except Steam) tries to tie in the physical copy."
This is a point, how did we ever come to accept Steam? My Steam account has about 250 games on it, or so and i don't care that technically they could all vanish tomorrow. Steam does offer the ability to play offline but this won't prevent some games being classed as "unavailable" should you try to run them so how did this ever come to be? Is it purely down to the Valve never really being dicks about it in the first place so we've never much questioned it? They provide nice services and suchlikes (as in being able to hop into other peoples games easily and voice comms being included now, etc, etc) but then xbox has offered all of these abilities anyway. Maybe if the original xbox had started with the DRM and then added on features to compensate for it people wouldn't be so pissed?
I have no ideawhy this is but you have to concede it is interesting how Steam appears acceptable. Not sure i'll buy either console, pc does just fine with me but i am tempted by the PS4...
Someone had to link it didn't they, may as well be me:
This aside, i've played at a high level in FPS games for several years (dropped it off in the last 4 or so) and it has to be said that i think there is something in this. I learned to play FPS on a really old game whereby you could gain a significant advantage if you dropped the graphics settings to the point you could see people through the tips of hilltops, the game basically turned into 'who can shoot the pixel' because combat worked from that far away (games like this were way better, shooting another player in the face at 20 meters just doesn't feel skillful compared to this). It took a long time to be able to spot the moving black pixels easily but after a while you can just kind of learn to do it, the interesting part is that the skill is transferable between games. You just seem to gain the ability to detect very small details in large scenes very quickly and it's something i had previously noticed myself. I'd like to see more research in this particular area.
I quite like Windows 8, still sad to see the return of the (largely irrelevant) start button. It should be noted that Windows 8 is the same as Windows 7, it works exactly the same. If you previously relied on the start menu and start button to get work done on Windows 7 then i feel that i really have to point out that you were just doing it wrong. You can't cry "productivity nightmare" over Windows 8 without being a user who fully utilises the shortcuts provided in Windows already. Tidy your house before you start telling other people about the mess in theirs. I work as a software engineer and i am an avid gamer (ex pro-level, in fact [CS: S in case anyone even cares]) and running Windows 8 hasn't affected either of these activities in any detrimental way, in fact i've seen performance increases in a few games after having moved to Windows 8 (which i concede could be incidental due to Direct X/driver updates, etc). The installation of Windows 8 was also seamless but I hear others did have issues; I’m not sure how this is supposed to be surprising as I can’t think of a Microsoft operating system that didn’t have install issues on some machines.
Downvotes, etc. I care not.
Paul, funnily enough my comment wasn't particularly aimed at you was it, are you amongst the people complaining who haven't used it? No, that's what i thought.
I've had none of the problems you've mentioned with Win 8 so far, It worked fine on all of my (far from current) hardware, all installed smoothly as well. I upgraded rather than fragged my Win 7 install which seems to have gone smoother than previous versions of Windows did when doing this. My opinion funnily enough doesn't come from the windows marketing team, i damn well wish it did... i could use the money. It is perfectly acceptable that some people can like Windows 8, and by the same token people can dislike it.
Disliking it without using it is somewhat less credible than having used it and disliked it though and i suspect a lot of people in these forums are the former and not the latter and i think this explains why Microsoft isn't listening to their "opinions", god knows i wouldn't.
...that they have buckled and actually put it back in at all if i am honest. I don't miss it, i'm probably in the minority since i use shortcuts for everything but i was actually glad to see the back of the start menu in it's old form. If you all love it so much go back to windows 7 (with it's start button and it being a perfectly fine OS) and keep using that. I don't understand why you would bother to whine on here that windows 8 isn't how you want it, well that's unfortunate... Do you suddenly have to stop using 7 because of it? That's what i thought.
Thankfully i've managed to shake "most" of the people i used to get this from but for a while i used to make a habit of "helping" in the sense i would tell them what was wrong, tell them what needed to be done but at no point even suggest i was going to do it for them. Very quickly the ones who don't want to learn cease asking you what is wrong, the ones that do want to know how to solve these petty problems i have more patience with.
Yes because posting anonymously on an internet forum to aggressively insult a reasonably wide range of people with vulgar language based on your own personal opinion is the mark of a truly remarkable individual whose lofty heights of morality we should all aspire too.
Wait a moment, I’m sure I have a tiny violin in here somewhere to quell your pseudo-rage.
I have no vested interest in this either way, I just can't resist the opportunity to mock such a stupidly pointless post.
Stating the obvious but still, it's true. Sadly i like the battlefield series to much not to install it, judge as you will. It did amuse me somewhat that i logged in the other night to be greeted with a 1 question survey asking me if i would recommend Origin to my friends, i couldn't hit the "no, not ever" response quick enough, i would hope everyone else does the same.
I installed Win 8 over a Win 7 install about 3 days ago or so, got to say that so far i actually like it. All of this rampant "it's rubbish" type speak is a complete nonsense. It took me all of about 30 mins to learn how to use it, since it largely works exactly like Win 7 did, and it is faster (or at least it seems to be on my machine).
As for the start menu, in between pinning to the desktop and windows + r what exactly do you need? If anything, for the type of user who needs to use the start menu that much, i'd think the visually appealing large interface would be helpful.
This happens once a day, but not every day.
I originally thought that when I occasionally made a truly exquisite cup of tea that really it was just the best cup of the many cups I’d had that day. Now some days I don't manage to make a truly brilliant cup of tea at all. It always seems to occur sometime after eating (so, never in the morning) and I seemingly do nothing different when making it but somehow it is amazing compared to all the others. Despite years of trying, I have still to track down the exact method to make this infrequently occurring cup of awesome.
"My understanding is Darksiders was a moderate success,"
No, this isn't true... Darksiders, the original, was a moderate success, so much so that they were in two minds whether to even bother to make a sequel. They eventually decided on it and I think this firmly showed that they should not have made a sequel since it was just a re-hash of the same game.
Aren't we overlooking DoW here? That was a massive THQ owned franchise that had only gone downhill in recent times and I don't hold much hope for DoW 3. THQ failed for a multitude of reasons but being "too original" was most certainly not one of them, Darksiders was just a clone of 'God of War" for example...
Also Battlefield 3, a clone of CoD? Yes, I guess you may be onto something there. In the same way that Ridge Racer is a clone of Grand Turismo... As in they happen to be the same genre. I feel if you want to draw the similarities of CoD and BF3 into question then you can't ignore that God of War and Darksiders are practically the same game.
"I still have my old spccies, c64 and cpc464, snes and nes etc and i love breaking them out for some old games. in 30 years and i get nostalgiac for some ps4 games i don't want to be stopped with errors because the sony server was decommissioned years before"
I think the main problem here is that by this time you will have used your Playstation 4 to keep the undead hordes at bay by hitting them with it and are now wearing what remains of it as a sort of improvised armour in the "Apophis" asteroid torn world of 2043.
Which bit wasn't a black eye?
The tedious little note added to their site regarding a UK court hearing that suggested UK courts are rubbish? (Which i don't particularly disagree with, they are, but it's not for Apple to be hinting at that).
The whole maps issue?
The lackluster release of products this last year doing nothing to really innovate at all? (Not that i am saying any company actually did, Samsung probably did more than Apple in the last year though, like it or hate it).
The continuation of these pointless, pointless court cases?
I could probably go on but i can't be bothered to go digging. Apple have had a bad year, both technology wise and PR wise. Maybe you need to start actually looking at what Apple did over the last year before you start trying to summon a hoard of fan boys frothing at the mouth from your imagination to explain survey results as anything other than they are.
It doesn't seem completely unreasonable. There are other devices whereby the solder on the board inside was less than perfect and had a tendency to crack causing connections to fail. This was fixed by heating it up at which point the fissures would re-seal. I wish i could remember what device this was but i think it's affected more than a few things. Not sure that is the case here, just thought i'd mention it.
Have to agree with some people here, quite sad. I went from one of the top of the range Asus boards to an Intel board and couldn't be happier with it. The Asus (and all the hassle it caused me over the year or so i had it) was just flaky by comparison and when it's a third more expensive i'm not sure that's a good quality, amazing features or not.
but i abandoned msn a long time ago for... Steam of all things, between that and whatsapp on my phone i've managed to rid myself of MSN entirely. It was surprisingly easy and i recommend getting rid of it to anyone over using Skype, the bloated piece of rubbish it is.
Surely the idea here is that it would not be flown into a warzone? I'm not convinced they are trying to create it to fly into active warzones where they do not already hold the air. Take the Iraq war as an example, within 1-2 days of the conflict there was little/no threat of planes being shot down (although it did still happen, didn't it). Given the load something like this could hold, landing even close to where you'd like to be will still be a better idea than trying to get everything in using conventional planes (Considering cost/how much this can move) i'd have thought.
If it's largely hardware (vehicles, etc) then it can move on it's own after you land, if not and it's equipment then it's just loaded up and moved after landing via vehicles. I'm not convinced you'd even bother trying to fly something like a C130 into an active warzone where you don't already hold air dominance so i don't see this as being much different really.
If your against an opponent who has a reasonable air force/surface-air defence, i don't think this is "that" much more vulnerable than any cargo plane and if you are going to fly it over SAMs, etc then you deserve to have it shot down.
Just what i reckon...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020