Unfortunately, at least in my scenario, it's not an AMD vs nVidia. I was on nVidia before with CoD: Ghosts... still very poor fps, and still the same answer, disable your dual GPUs, and the game will run better.

Maybe it's a CoD problem more so than other devs, but really... If one of the biggest titles to launch every year isn't optimizing for dual GPU cards, there isn't much of a reason to buy one if big AAA devs aren't going to take advantage of it.

It's like you're throwing your money away buying the 2nd GPU.

I do agree about the drivers tho, I constantly see driver updates for nVidia cards, and sit and wonder where AMD's drivers are.

Single nVidia GPU for me from here on out.

Too bad those "The way it's meant to be played" mean shit when it comes to the devs supporting your companies top-of-the-line cards.

The sad thing is, as an owner of an AMD 7990 (dual GPU) and seeing that most of todays games run horrible with a dual GPU setup because the devs have not taken the time to code for it, my next upgrade I will be forced to go to a single GPU card.

So either way, both companies have a darker side that isn't talked about as much as they should be in reviews.

Example: i7 4.2Ghz, 16GB ram, AMD 7990 GFX card, CoD: AW @ 1920x1080 will drop to 7fps.... IN THE MENU. (and it's not just COD). I've seen multiple new releases run like crap.

Talk to support, they answer is disable crossfire. Why pay for a dual GPU if no new games are supporting them, because their biggest audience runs 1 GPU.

I wish a new company would knock both AMD and nVdia on their ass, and take over with better tech, faster cards, and not be so sleazy. (One can dream)

Actually no, I know I have an Irish accent. And yes, everyone has some kind of accent, but it's a question of degrees. A Scottish accent or a deep south US accent is far more pronounced than a neutral English accent.

The point is that an accent is a deviation from standard pronunciation.

I guess that if an AI "learned" language from Die Antwoord, it would have a South African accent. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a scene where Dev Patel leaves and finds the robot has learned to speak while he was away.

Anyway, as I said... because movies.

Hugh Jackmans haircut is still stupid though

My post is not hyperbole, but actual personal observation.



You also have to factor in cost+ funding.

On one hand, it's necessary. Because you don't know how much something truly new will cost - you haven't done it before. You'll discover as you go.
It would be unfair to bind a company to a fixed cost, when nobody knows what the cost will be. It's mathematically unreasonable to entertain a fixed cost on new technologies.

(Granted, everyone gives silly lowballed best-case estimates when bidding. Anyone that injects a sense of reality into their bid is too costly and doesn't get the contract).

On the other hand, cost+ means that you make more money by spending more money. So hiring hordes of nobodies for every little task, making 89347589374 different position titles, is only gonna make you more money. There's no incentive to save.



F35 wise, like I said, it's not designed for any war we fight now.
It's designed for a war we could fight in the future.
Because you don't start designing weapons when you're in a war, you give your best effort to have them already deployed, tested, and iterated into a good sustainable state, before the onset of a conflict that could require them.

F35 variations are not complicated. The VTOL variation is the only one with any complexity. The others are no more complex than historical variations from early to late blocks of any given airframe.

The splitting of manufacturing isn't in itself a complication ridden approach. It's rather normal for different companies to work on unrelated systems. Airframe will go somewhere, avionics elsewhere, engine elsewhere, etc. That's basically a given, because different companies specialize in different things.

Keep in mind that the large prime contracts (Lockheed/GD/etc) don't actually "make" many things. They are systems integrators. They farm out the actual development for most pieces (be it in house contractors or external contractors - because they are easy to let go after the main dev is over), and they themselves specialize in stitching the pieces together. Connecting things is not difficult when they are designed with specified ICDs from the get-go. The black boxes just plug up to each other and go.

The issues that arise are often a matter of playing telephone. With one sub needing to coordinate with another sub, but they have to go through the prime, and the prime is filtering everything through a bunch of non-technical managers. Most problems are solved in a day or two when two subs physically get their engineers together and sort out any miscommunications (granted, contracts and process might not allow them the then fix the problem in a timely and affordable manner).

The F22 and F35 issues are not major insurmountable tasks. The hardest flaws are things that can be fixed in a couple months tops on the engineering side. What takes time is the politics. Engineers can't "just fix it". There's no path forward for that kind of work.

Sure, in a magic wonderland you could tell them "here, grab the credit card, buy what you need, make any changes you need, and let us know when you're done" - and a little while later you'd have a collection of non-approved, non-reviewed, non-traceable, non-contractually-covered changes that "just fix the damn thing"... and you'd also have to incur the wrath of entire departments who were denied the opportunity to validate their existence. The 'high paid welfare' system would be all over your ass.

-scheherazade

Lets all hope the devs have not promised more than they can deliver. Otherwise this game will be my new alter life. Fingers crossed and wallet open. Thanks for the vid.

The thumbnail image for this video has been updated - thumbnail added by eric3579.

As far as I can tell, those studies on Wikipedia don't compare wages on a per job basis. They make generalized comparisons based on industry which is overly broad. We need studies that compare wages between men and women in the same positions.

I've worked in the games industry for over 7 years in teams that had several female devs and I've never encountered any of the issues you describe. I'm not saying that they can never happen but it's faulty to assume that every woman in the industry experiences discrimination and harassment. For example, one of the lead programmers at Double Fine is a woman and she seems pretty happy with her job.

As for why the fields of science and engineering are dominated by men, that's a complex issue. The fact that they are dominated by men might be enough to dissuade most women, as people generally don't like to be the minority. However, that will never change unless more women try. It's not like a ton of women try to become scientists or engineers and then quit because of harassment and discrimination. Most women don't even attempt to become scientists or engineers in the first place.

I've never used Oculus yet. I have no idea what version of the kit this is. Concerned at the lag between head movement and movement on the monitors. Very noticable, is this the first dev kit?

Does that lag even matter? Is it far more refreshed in the headset versus what we see on the monitor?

This video is a small portion of a much more interesting video about Phil Fish, the infamous indie dev of Fez.

The Nickleback thing is just an analogy; he's actually talking about why people love to hate Phil Fish and what it means. Recommend watching the whole video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTUW-owa2w

I really enjoyed Dead Island. Yes, it had plenty of flaws, and when it came out also a few bugs, but the devs worked them out, and it was a pretty fun. If they can make it truly open world on this one, and learned from their mistakes it will be great.

I would totally go see the CGI "Elder Scrolls Online: The Movie" in theaters.

I will NOT be buying ESO: Online the game. The first time I have not bought an Elder Scrolls game. I don't know where Bethesda got it in their heads that people wanted a TES MMO. The whole idea of playing Elder Scrolls in groups just puts me off.

Plus, no way in hell I'm paying $15/mo subscription, or submitting to any other monetizing scheme.

What really burns me is that they're wasting all this dev time on the project. Not only am I waiting a whole extra dev cycle for my next TES game...but the amount of money they're investing is staggering. What if this brings down the franchise? It's a bone headed move.

Hmm, didn't know that Massive is doing the dev for this game. I've played their World in Conflict and the details are awesome during its time. If it's the same set of people in Massive (or at least most of them) doing the engine and the game, it may be a safe bet that the game will have a solid gameplay to go with these great visuals.

There's a saying in Nethack... The Dev Team think of everything. GTA5 seems to be taking a great leaf out of their book.

My friend has one of the dev versions. I got to play Half-Life 2 on it for a while. I agree. It's going to be a revolution.

Well, at the time they were the only console doing online well. They also had superior hardware and a far superior development environment (which was already familiar to PC devs) which led to a lot of high quality games in a short amount of time.

I assume you'll be buying a Wii U?