The "What are you playing now?" Thread

[gourimoko]

I really can't stop gushing about gsync @gourimoko I think it's the best technology that has come out for gaming in a long time. Everybody want's VR though when i'd much rather buy a nice gsync monitor.

I agree. I absolutely love Adaptive Sync (see what I did there? lol.. I actually think FreeSync is a better protocol, but Gsync works better for the time being).

In April I'm either upgrading the 1080.. Not sure which direction I'll go, but it won't be with AMD (given the G-Sync ASUS ROG)..

Thinking of either:

1) Adding another 1080; prices should go down, might buy a used one, go SLI.
2) Selling the 1080 and buying a 1080 Ti
3) Selling the 1080 and buying a Titan XP (depends on how powerful the Ti is).
4) Selling the 1080 and buying 2x1080 Ti's.. just go ham, like fuck it.

Will all depend on 1080 Ti's price point upon release, and if I can convince EVGA to get me into their upgrade program (apparently they upgrade the 1080 if you bought it like 3 weeks after I bought mine -- fuckers.. Thinking if I get someone on the phone from sales, I might be able to coax them into letting me upgrade my current card if I agree to buy another 1080 Ti).

...

Oh, and re: VR; it's a budding technology. I have a setup at home, but the games for it.. aren't very good.

The problem with VR is that the technology isn't there .. yet. And by technology, I mean game engines and shaders.. The latest cards have better hardware features that allow for rendering similar scenes 2x faster, which makes VR that much better; but game developers aren't focusing on these features since you can't be sure gamers have these cards.

Once these hardware features become more common-place, and shaders/game-engines start taking advantage of them, as well as having engines treating VR as a first-class class citizen within their ecosystems; then I think VR will have more of a qualitative edge over a great display...

Because technologically, VR should provide for a better experience; and the next iteration of headsets almost assuredly will have equivalent or better image quality (higher DPI, IPS/OLED panels, better color than most home displays, etc)... It's just that the content on the displays isn't very good...

But VR is the future, IMHO... so, in a few years I think we'll look back and say that VR really is the greater of the two "inventions..." Even though VR has been around since the 80s.

 

[TyGuy]

Basically every console-centric game has PC performance issues these days. As far as the story goes, I haven't finished it yet, but Human Revolution's story wasn't exactly amazing, and the ending(s) sucked there too. Aside from the crazy conspiracy shit, Deus Ex games are really more about the exploration and the ability to play the game multiple ways and accomplish objectives however you want, and the game has all of that. I was really enjoying it when I played it. I only stopped because a billion other things came out and I have yet to get back to it.

I agree with some of this here. I do like a really good story and dialogue. I mostly enjoyed deus ex for the gameplay like you said.

Some console games run extremely well on pc. Doom you fly around that game at 100 + fps the entire time when running the vulkan API and the game is gorgeous. What outstanding optimization by ID software. The witcher 3 is another one. Although you can argue it's pc first and console second. That game is a 30 fps cap on consoles, but will run at 60 + fps for over 90% of the game.

 

[Jack Brickman]

I agree with some of this here. I do like a really good story and dialogue. I mostly enjoyed deus ex for the gameplay like you said.

Some console games run extremely well on pc. Doom you fly around that game at 100 + fps the entire time when running the vulkan API and the game is gorgeous. What outstanding optimization by ID software. The witcher 3 is another one. Although you can argue it's pc first and console second. That game is a 30 fps cap on consoles, but will run at 60 + fps for over 90% of the game.

Yeah, some console games do run well, but I think they are becoming increasingly few and far between, at least for AAA games. The PC port is often handed off to another company who inevitably does a half-ass job.

And yeah I'd say Witcher 3 was absolutely PC first, which makes sense as the series has always been on PC. And even then, Witcher 3 had a lot of issues when it first launched. It's smooth as butter now, but when it released I experienced regular crashes (about once per two hours, give or take) and slowdown.

As far as Mankind Divided goes, the dialogue all seems pretty good and the story is at least interesting. I've heard the ending leaves a bit to be desired, but again I haven't finished it yet so I can't say for sure. But the ending of Human Revolution left a lot to be desired too. Hell, the endings of the original Deus Ex weren't all that great either.

 

[MD13]

Just an FYI, the March Humble monthly bundle gives you Total War: Warhammer (and six other games to be announced later) for twelve bucks. Another great deal for a relatively new game that is still selling for sixty bucks on Steam.

The February bundle was X-Com 2, ABZU, Ryse: Son of Rome, Steamworld Heist, Okhlos, Project Highrise, Husk, and two Humble originals (Oh, Deer and a sneak peak at a cool-looking game called Hollow Knight).

Thanks @Jack Brickman , I'd been wanting to play Warhammer Total War but the price tag was way too high. I wish there was a way to get some of the DLC races on the cheap as well...

 

[TyGuy]

I agree. I absolutely love Adaptive Sync (see what I did there? lol.. I actually think FreeSync is a better protocol, but Gsync works better for the time being).

In April I'm either upgrading the 1080.. Not sure which direction I'll go, but it won't be with AMD (given the G-Sync ASUS ROG)..

Thinking of either:

1) Adding another 1080; prices should go down, might buy a used one, go SLI.
2) Selling the 1080 and buying a 1080 Ti
3) Selling the 1080 and buying a Titan XP (depends on how powerful the Ti is).
4) Selling the 1080 and buying 2x1080 Ti's.. just go ham, like fuck it.

Will all depend on 1080 Ti's price point upon release, and if I can convince EVGA to get me into their upgrade program (apparently they upgrade the 1080 if you bought it like 3 weeks after I bought mine -- fuckers.. Thinking if I get someone on the phone from sales, I might be able to coax them into letting me upgrade my current card if I agree to buy another 1080 Ti).

...

Oh, and re: VR; it's a budding technology. I have a setup at home, but the games for it.. aren't very good.

The problem with VR is that the technology isn't there .. yet. And by technology, I mean game engines and shaders.. The latest cards have better hardware features that allow for rendering similar scenes 2x faster, which makes VR that much better; but game developers aren't focusing on these features since you can't be sure gamers have these cards.

Once these hardware features become more common-place, and shaders/game-engines start taking advantage of them, as well as having engines treating VR as a first-class class citizen within their ecosystems; then I think VR will have more of a qualitative edge over a great display...

Because technologically, VR should provide for a better experience; and the next iteration of headsets almost assuredly will have equivalent or better image quality (higher DPI, IPS/OLED panels, better color than most home displays, etc)... It's just that the content on the displays isn't very good...

But VR is the future, IMHO... so, in a few years I think we'll look back and say that VR really is the greater of the two "inventions..." Even though VR has been around since the 80s.

There will always be issues with fatigue and your head getting hot. Wearing a screen around your face for a long period of time is going to make your head sweat. Your vr headset will probably smell like a hockey helmet over time.

Games also need to be 90 fps and never dip to avoid wanting to puke. They need to use some sort of syncing technology to have no input lag penalty much like gsync. Although, you don't want a variable framerate with any vr games. Standards need to be very strict there.

I hear PlayStation vr gets around the 90 fps thing by doing 120 refreshrate, but games run at like a half vsync to get 60 fps. The games look like ass because of the inadequate hardware though to achieve that framerate.

 

[gourimoko]

There will always be issues with fatigue and your head getting hot. Wearing a screen around your face for a long period of time is going to make your head sweat. Your vr headset will probably smell like a hockey helmet over time.

Not necessarily.. There are already air coolers for VR headsets, and as panels get better, they also get cooler; particularly OLEDs.

Games also need to be 90 fps and never dip to avoid wanting to puke. They need to use some sort of syncing technology to have no input lag penalty much like gsync.

This isn't an issue as the SDKs already handle this. Occulus and Vive games run at 90hz v-sync'd (90 fps). They don't use adaptive sync at all since that would still make you want to puke.

But this is what I was saying in my first post; that the games look terrible because of these high demands. This won't be the case once the SDKs catch up to the hardware. The 1080/1070 and new Radeon cards are already capable of doing this kind of rendering with much less overhead that older generation cards.

Although, you don't want a variable framerate with any vr games. Standards need to be very strict there.

Yep. But that's what Rift and Vive enforce as it is now.

I hear PlayStation vr gets around the 90 fps thing by doing 120 refreshrate, but games run at like a half vsync to get 60 fps.

Well, I wouldn't say that...

The Sony SDK allows for three operational modes; 120fps interpolated @ 120 hz, 120fps @ 120 hz, and 90fps @ 90 hz. All of the modes are V-Sync. The 120fps interpolated isn't the same as 60fps; the i-frames are interpolated to create new data, so the effect is essentially motion blur; but this isn't the same as a 60fps image.

To the viewer, the 120fps interpolated image will seem more fluid, but blurrier. This is like Trumotion video for LED/LCD TVs.

The PSVR does have a few titles at all three of these settings and it's up to developers to test which method works best.

The games look like ass because of the inadequate hardware though to achieve that framerate.

The games don't look as nice as Rift/Vive games obviously, but there are different methods of achieving a good look in a VR space. No the PS4Pro isn't as capable as a GTX 980, but, you can still get a decently looking VR game out of it.

I actually think Sony's done a great job given the hardware they're working with... I've used all three technologies (I have a Vive) and I think the PSVR is great for what it is.

 

[TyGuy]

I still think it will be a niche thing. It will be great for certain titles like flight simulators or space flight games. Although I want to see my hand and joystick in game to make the experience feel more real.

Competitive games I don't see going there anytime soon because of how precise mouse and keyboard input is.

Also, fatigue I still think will be a factor. Some people will just want to relax.

@gourimoko

 

[gourimoko]

I still think it will be a niche thing. It will be great for certain titles like flight simulators or space flight games. Although I want to see my hand and joystick in game to make the experience feel more real.

Competitive games I don't see going there anytime soon because of how precise mouse and keyboard input is.

Also, fatigue I still think will be a factor. Some people will just want to relax.

@gourimoko

I agree, for the time being; but I think that's largely due to cost.

Over time you might be right as well, but.. here's my take on it:

For simulations, VR is just.. a no-brainer, so that includes competitive racing games. I think a hybrid of augmented reality and VR (with racing wheels and shifters in physical space being represented accurately in virtual space) will likely lead to most people who play competitive racing games and spend the money on the setups to move over to VR. I just think the experience, with respect to audio/visual, would be too hard to pass up. Especially being able to look over your shoulder or at a 90 degree angle without having a completely wrap-around display setup (that's expensive as fuck).

I fit into the category of competitive racing player, at least, I used to before moving to Hawaii. I'd love to get back into it but just don't have the space for a proper setup.

With that said though, I'm not sure if FPS could also take advantage of the capabilities of VR down the road. I mean, obviously today it's not very likely, but in 5-10 years? Absolutely. VR headsets will likely be much much lighter, cooler, and better than anything else on the market, and the panels will have likely caught up to, and perhaps even surpassed (yes, surpassed) the most widely used consumer displays. The reason this is likely possible is panel size and cost to produce. As more of these panels are made, and shared with cell phones, the higher end smaller panels will have a much lower cost of production than an equivalent panel that's much larger.

Keep in mind, OLED is a technology revolutionizing the TV industry today; and yet, very similar technoology has been in phones for years. Even today, most homes still don't have an OLED TV because of the cost to manufacture panels that size. Computer monitors fall somewhere between these two, obviously, but with high resolution, high refresh, and low latency, the costs of the panels again go up and up.

This is why I think VR panels will eventually exceed the quality one can get for an average consumer grade monitor (not necessarily the highest end panels).

As far as fatigue, I've used my Gear VR just laying down flat on my back in bed. I've played KOTOR2 like this actually, lol.. It wasn't an ideal experience, more of a test, but it was interesting.. I'd say it's comparably relaxing to playing a console game on a comfy couch.

I think, as the technology progresses, we'll see more people willing to take a VR headset and just escape into a game for either causal or competitive gameplay more often than they would choose to sit at a desk. We're not really close to that today; but in 10-15 years? I think so.

I think a few of the games that won't be easy to transition to will be fighting games in competition (since you're playing side-by-side), and mouse-heavy games... like Civilization, that depend on massive UIs.. But that assumes game makers don't adapt their games to more casual interfaces (especially if more people start using Steam machines, or depending games like Civ on the Xbox/PS4.)

 

[Jack Brickman]

I still think it will be a niche thing. It will be great for certain titles like flight simulators or space flight games. Although I want to see my hand and joystick in game to make the experience feel more real.

Competitive games I don't see going there anytime soon because of how precise mouse and keyboard input is.

Also, fatigue I still think will be a factor. Some people will just want to relax.

@gourimoko

VR definitely seems better for some game types and genres than others. For example, Resident Evil 7 makes a ton of sense in VR. First-person, limited perspective, not incredibly combat-focused (there is combat, but aside from the boss fights it's not a focal point), and atmospheric. Perfect game for VR.

I tried TF2 in VR back before I sold my Oculus dev kit and I didn't like it, though. It was really cool to be able to aim with the mouse and still look around, but other than that it was much more difficult to play.

 

[gourimoko]

VR definitely seems better for some game types and genres than others. For example, Resident Evil 7 makes a ton of sense in VR. First-person, limited perspective, not incredibly combat-focused (there is combat, but aside from the boss fights it's not a focal point), and atmospheric. Perfect game for VR.

I tried TF2 in VR back before I sold my Oculus dev kit and I didn't like it, though. It was really cool to be able to aim with the mouse and still look around, but other than that it was much more difficult to play.

Yea, I mean, 2D fighters, UI heavy games.. those games will surely be harder to play; but I think the bulk of games could be adapted to VR.

I'm very intrigued by the idea of playing a game like Fallout 4 or Skyrim (or the new TES) in VR. These are games that are essentially driven by the immersive nature of the environments; so, if they translate well, it should be a sign of what's to come.

 

[TyGuy]

@Jack Brickman So, mankind divided isn't a dog after all. The bench mark with a lot of the eye candy cranked up I hit a minimum of 59. In actual gameplay I didn't see it drop below 70 fps. It was actually hit triple digit frame rates for good chunks and my does the game look glorious at that frame rate.

Smooth motion to me is every bit as important as the actual image quality and this game doesn't lack in that department.

There are a lot of things to tweak in the menus and I like how many options it gives you for mouse control. You can really fine tune the mouse sensitivity to exactly where you like it. A lot of games fail hard with their mouse sensitivity sliders.

@gourimomo

What is a disappointment is the DX 12 performance. It's actually worse for me than dx 11. In the benchmark I hit a higher max frame rate, but both the average and minimum were lower.

 

[Jack Brickman]

@Jack Brickman So, mankind divided isn't a dog after all. The bench mark with a lot of the eye candy cranked up I hit a minimum of 59. In actual gameplay I didn't see it drop below 70 fps. It was actually hit triple digit frame rates for good chunks and my does the game look glorious at that frame rate.

I'd imagine they've done some work on it since the game came out. Even Arkham Knight got decently polished eventually, and Mankind Divided was never anywhere near that much of a shit show.

 

[TyGuy]

I'd imagine they've done some work on it since the game came out. Even Arkham Knight got decently polished eventually, and Mankind Divided was never anywhere near that much of a shit show.

Arkham has a locked 90 fps cap and it is very smooth on foot never wavering. When driving the frame-rate will dip into the 40's which is pretty jarring coming from 90 fps. Luckily it only really happens driving around. I can't bring myself to go back to that game because I hate the riddler challenges.

Manking divided's ultra texture setting takes up over 6 gigs of Vram!! That's the most i've ever seen at 1080 P. Some of the texture work is just outstanding in this game. I couldn't imagine how much vram it requires to run ultra at 1440 p and up to 4k.

 

[Jack Brickman]

All this talk of the new Torment game has inspired me to go back and replay Planescape. Man, I haven't played this game since like 2000. Thankfully, GOG has me covered.

I also finally got around to downloading GOG Galaxy. It won't replace Steam at this point, but it's a competent game launcher/manager that might actually get me to play (or replay in some cases) some of the classic games I've purchased from GOG over the years.

Oh, and I got into the Gwent beta. FUCK YES!

Finally, rather than pay sixty bucks for the new Resident Evil game, I've decided to just watch someone play it on YouTube with no commentary. I need to do this with other linear games. It's free, I can lounge on my couch while I watch, and I don't really feel like I'm missing out on anything because RE7 is a very linear game. I'm not really the type to replay games unless I really, really like them (hence why I've played Portal 2 like four times now despite it having basically zero replay value), so RE7's supposed replay value is lost on me anyway.

 

[Jack Brickman]

Oh yeah, and I'm over halfway through my co-op playthrough of Resident Evil 6. Sweet Jesus is the writing in this game godawful. It's like enjoyable bad, though, rather than just offensively bad. I did love how there's a character who has antibodies in his blood that can save the world, and the US intelligence girl has to call her superiors to clear his request of fifty million dollars for his willingness to help out. That's a laughably small amount of money to haggle over when it comes to saving the entire fucking planet from people who for some unknown reason really want to wipe out humanity, which to me seems like somewhat of a short-sighted endgame.

Anyway, the best part of this game is still making fun of how terrible and ridiculous it all is with my buddy. The controls are the dirt fucking worst, though. It's like someone who has never played a third-person shooter decided to make a third-person shooter. The camera is more terrifying than most of the creatures in the game. There's one segment during the Chris Redfield campaign where the shitty camera caused my friend and I to fail like ten times. You have to run from a helicopter shooting at you, and minor fuck-ups lead to an instant failure and checkpoint restart (Horrible Game Design 101). If the camera were functional, it probably wouldn't have been a big deal, but the camera is constantly swinging from one direction to another, causing you to run in the wrong direction, and the characters already control like drunken tanks.

So yeah, bad game. But fun enough with a friend.