Droniac's Avatar

Droniac profile

60
Droniac Avatar
Droniac responded to panbient comment in
1 Month ago
PewDiePie apologises for anti-Semitic stunt after slamming the media coveragePewDiePie apologises for anti-Semitic stunt after slamming the media coverage
panbient Avatar

Of course not everything needs to be Disney-fied. But the fact remains he had gotten big enough to be purchased by Disney - same as they purchased those other 'minor' cultural points of interest like Star Wars and Marvel Comics. Heck they even own 80% of ESPN.


To dismiss Disney's industry clout based on online followers is just foolish.

Droniac Avatar

Actually, your "fact" is wrong.


Disney purchased Maker Studios, not PewDiePie. PewDiePie, along with many other YouTubers, had a network contract with Maker Studios at the time of that purchase. Now he doesn't.


Similarly, his channel got dropped from YouTube Red, but not YouTube entirely. He still has well over 50 million subs and is still making (annoying) videos and millions of dollars.


This might damage his prospects for certain types of projects outside the scope of his own channel and it does damage his reach to (some) advertisers. But you're vastly overestimating the impact this will have on his income or success going forward.

sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac responded to Belimawr comment in
1 Month ago
Feeling antisocial? Here are eight MMOs you can basically play aloneFeeling antisocial? Here are eight MMOs you can basically play alone
Belimawr Avatar
why do all these things have to be videos now? I realise it is easier than having to actually write something but I honestly hate going to sights and then have to sit and watch someone prattle on about random things to fill time instead of being bale to just go to a web page and reference what I want to know or see without having to sit through a bunch of stuff I have no interest in.

honestly I think video will be the death of these types of site as they are making them self redundant as if you are just going to have to watch a video you may as well go watch videos by some high end youtuber instead of someone trying to jump on the youtuber bandwagon to get clicks.
Droniac Avatar

Actually, you have that the wrong way around.


The video likely required a script, recording someone voicing that script, finding/capturing appropriate game footage, editing it all together, rendering, uploading, etc. It'd have taken more time and is technically more involved / difficult.


An article would involve writing the article and optionally finding a couple screenshots or videos to link to. Maybe some editing. Then submit and done.


A video like this normally takes substantially more time and effort to produce than a similar top-X-list article, in my experience.


That being said, I did click this expecting an article, not a video. Or at least a written summary beneath the video. It might be an idea to clearly label categories of posts on the front page? "Interview", "Review", "Video", etc.

sign in to comment
Dave James Avatar
Dave James responded to Droniac's comment in
2 Months ago
Best gaming headsetBest gaming headset
Droniac Avatar
I think it's important to make note of the open-back vs closed-back choice when it comes to selecting a headset or headphones. Closed-back sets have the advantage that they isolate you from the outside world. No audio coming in or going out the back. They also have the disadvantage of generally quite significantly lower audio quality when compared to otherwise similar open-back designs.

There seems to be a clear preference for closed-back designs in this selection, yet that's never stated as a requirement of "the best gaming headsets". It would be good to clearly state what your requirements and preferences are beforehand in this regard, because your readers won't necessarily share those requirements or preference. Particularly when it comes to closed vs open back.

Also, having looked up some actual comparisons, experiences and statistics for the headsets mentioned. None of them rival even dated and less expensive low to mid-end headphones. Not even the ATH-ADG1x, which apparently use the AD-700x drivers. Those are $100 headphones that they stuck a (not very good) microphone on and started selling for $299 as a "gaming headset"!

The Sennheiser GAME ONE is a HD558 with a not very good microphone being sold at a HD598 price. It's not even a contest in terms of audio quality and frequency range. Heck, that 6-year-old HD598 trounces every single non-headphone in this selection, including the much more expensive ATH-ADG1x. And the HD598 has long been surpassed at its price point by other headphones...

In short: if you actually want decent audio and are willing to spend that kind of money on gaming headsets, then get a less expensive headphone with a separate low-end USB studio mic. You'll have better audio quality across the board and it'll be no more expensive.Reply
Dave James Avatar

Closed vs. Open Back principles are not as cut and dried as one automatically sounds better than the other. The QH-90s (the original Cloud) imo sounds better than the open back QH-80s,and i had the same experience with the ATH-AG1x and ATH-ADG1x headsets.


Often you get a more natural soundscape with open back sets but it's not necessarily the case that the audio quality is inherently worse in closed back cans.


And audio is also one of those things that is incredibly subjective. Obviously my personal preferences will not be identical to everyone else's.


You are 100% right that if you value pure aural performance above all else then separate headphones are your best bet. I regularly use my PM3s for both gaming and music and they're fantastic. Especially with the new Tidal Master option!

sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac commented on
2 Months ago
Restricting players can be a good thing, as 2016's best shooters have provedRestricting players can be a good thing, as 2016's best shooters have proved
Droniac Avatar
I'm not sure that this design methodology works for arena shooters. A large portion of the tactical depth in those types of FPS games comes from the weapon variety and weapon/ammo pickup management, which also plays into map control. Not to mention the heavy emphasis on individual skill, which is core to the arena FPS genre yet utterly contradicts any restrictions placed on players. Restricting players to identifiable classes with set weapon loadouts and generic ammo pickups in an arena FPS seems to result in ... DOOM.

DOOM may be the best singleplayer FPS in years, but its multiplayer is quite possibly the first instance of an arena FPS that actually manages to be ... boring. Maybe the new Quake will handle things differently and make it work with some tweaking to the formula, but for now the only instance of an arena FPS heading into this direction has been a failure.

Otherwise I agree. Teambased multiplayer shooters in particular tend to benefit from identifiable classes with set abilities and restrictions. It's taken 15 years, but now pretty much every new teambased shooter is essentially an adaptation of Return to Castle Wolfenstein! Including objective-based gameplay and Enemy Territory's multi-map scenarios (hi, Battlefield 1, you nicked that beautifully and it's glorious)
sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac responded to TsunamiWombat comment in
3 Months ago
Crytek employee claims to have not yet been paid in 2017Crytek employee claims to have not yet been paid in 2017
TsunamiWombat Avatar
When I first heard of this I thought it was bullshit. Surely after 2-3 months of no pay, you could approach a lawyer, any lawyer, say "hey you wanna make a FUCKLOAD of money getting me my back pay in a class action!?" and get it done

Now... i'm still fairly certain it's bullshit, but credence is piling up
Droniac Avatar

I'm pretty sure class-action lawsuits don't work that way and, certainly in this case and in Europe, aren't that profitable. Also, given the update to the article, it now seems pretty clear that the story very likely was quite true. You don't do away with 5 out of 7 studios when everything is going fine :o

sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac responded to ManualCrowcaine comment in
3 Months ago
AMD are still fighting against history and all those forum comments of 'AMD drivers suck.'AMD are still fighting against history and all those forum comments of 'AMD drivers suck.'
ManualCrowcaine Avatar

Actually, you are misinformed. AMD still has performance, even to this very day, even prior to launching the Vega, which on paper trumps even the new Titan X Pascal. I believe you forgot about the Fury X. It performs very similarly to your GTX1070, and outperforms the GTX1070 is some DX12 based games, but even for DX11, it still holds it's own fairly well. Obviously the GTX1070 would be a better buy in terms of performance/dollar, but you said that it "trounces and AMD card on the market right now" and that is simply not the case.

Droniac Avatar

I am not misinformed in this regard. Though your post did make me double-check.


Take a look at a few benchmarks:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/nvidia_geforce_gtx_1070_review,17.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8gb-pascal-performance,4585-3.html

And FutureMark for good measure:

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu


To sum up benchmarks across the internet:

DX12: inconsistent, but the Fury X has a slight edge.

Anything else: the GTX1070 performs 20-40 fps better than the Fury X.


In other words: the Fury X performs well in the most ideal set of circumstances, but gets trounced in every other scenario. The every other scenario is far more common in the real world, because "DX12 games optimized with AMD in mind" is a very narrow set of games still and won't really become a major factor until about two years from now when there's decent DX12 saturation.


It should also be noted that the Fury X is factory-overclocked to its absolute limits and watercooled. Meanwhile the GTX1070's being used in most benchmarks are stock, which means they have quite some OC leeway still. My factory-OC GTX1070 (Palit SC) would widen that non-DX12 gap further, quite significantly, whereas a Fury X has no meaningful OC leeway left.


Moreover, even if DX12 games were common, the Fury X isn't a purchase any sane person would undertake right now. It costs 300 euro more than a GTX1070. Add another 40 euro on top and you have a factory-OC GTX1080 that significantly outperforms the Fury X even in DX12 and has notably lower power draw.


AMD has always had fantastic on-paper performance. It has always translated to poor real-world performance, until DX12. What AMD needs is DX12. Have this conversation again two-three years from now and yes the Fury X would be a contender against the GTX1070, but both would be irrelevant by then.

sign in to comment
ManualCrowcaine Avatar
ManualCrowcaine responded to Droniac's comment in
3 Months ago
AMD are still fighting against history and all those forum comments of 'AMD drivers suck.'AMD are still fighting against history and all those forum comments of 'AMD drivers suck.'
Droniac Avatar
The last time I used any AMD drivers was about a decade ago. Their drivers in the X800 era were ace, but then crashed and burned rather spectacularly (and quickly) in terms of game support.

Their new driver suite, adding in some form of recording software similar to Shadowplay make AMD a bit more interesting. Especially if they truly have game support on point, to which: I haven't heard of too many major issues with AMD drivers lately, so it's at the very least nowhere near as bad as it used to be. But they've got a very different problem than drivers right now: the performance just isn't there.

My GTX1070 trounces any AMD card on the market right now, by a huge margin, particularly in non-DX12 games (which is pretty much every game). I'm using a 1440p 144Hz monitor now and tend to record gameplay, so even that "extra" performance in games does actually matter. Which makes any and all AMD cards an absolute can't-buy. They've essentially given up on the performance market, so their cards just aren't interesting.

As to driver rating... on a different tack: I don't think I'd rate Nvidia's drivers at 4.5/5, particularly given how frequently their game-ready drivers have had major issues recently with causing artifacting (bf1) or even reducing memory clockspeeds.Reply
ManualCrowcaine Avatar

Actually, you are misinformed. AMD still has performance, even to this very day, even prior to launching the Vega, which on paper trumps even the new Titan X Pascal. I believe you forgot about the Fury X. It performs very similarly to your GTX1070, and outperforms the GTX1070 is some DX12 based games, but even for DX11, it still holds it's own fairly well. Obviously the GTX1070 would be a better buy in terms of performance/dollar, but you said that it "trounces and AMD card on the market right now" and that is simply not the case.

sign in to comment
SkankwOn Avatar
SkankwOn responded to Droniac's comment in
5 Months ago
It'll cost you $99 to rent a Battlefield 1 server from EA for 90 daysIt'll cost you $99 to rent a Battlefield 1 server from EA for 90 days
Droniac Avatar
It's odd that slot-count doesn't feature in that at all. Normally you'd rent servers for a specific number of slots, so a 40 slot server would be less expensive than a 60-slot one. This is going to make it pretty shitty for any actual clans (I'm assuming Battlefield on PC still has those) because they play with lower player counts and prices are going to be much higher because of this.Reply
SkankwOn Avatar

"This is going to make it pretty shitty for any actual clans" ... just a lot mate.

sign in to comment
Dave James Avatar
Dave James responded to Droniac's comment in
6 Months ago
Best gaming monitorBest gaming monitor
Droniac Avatar
Also looking at that PG279Q. A friend got one recently and they're sweet. Ridiculously expensive though.

I'll add a little something else on refresh rates too:
Higher refresh rates have the added benefit of making prolonged use less uncomfortable. At 60Hz you'll notice eyestrain or even a headache after an hour or two. Even at 80Hz that's already enormously reduced and at 120Hz you just won't notice it anymore. Which is another reason for me to get that PG279Q. Right now my secondary monitor is still 60Hz (and 1680x1050) :(Reply
Dave James Avatar

Great point about refresh rates!


I shifted from an old TN Swift at home, running at 144Hz, to a 60Hz panel because it was a 4K GSync screen. And I still really miss the high refresh...

sign in to comment
WhiteCrow Avatar
WhiteCrow responded to Droniac's comment in
7 Months ago
eSports host turns developer as James ‘2GD’ Harding launches Kickstarter for arena shooter DiaboticaleSports host turns developer as James ‘2GD’ Harding launches Kickstarter for arena shooter Diabotical
Droniac Avatar

I think you have the wrong game? This isn't Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare. It's an arena shooter. When it comes to the FPS genre, arena shooters tend to attract comparatively few headset-screaming capslock-ragers. So it's really not going to help you out any.

Reply
WhiteCrow Avatar

Respectfully disagree sir. The trailer makes its target audience crystal clear, and for that I thank them.

sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac replied to 5 questions on the Stellaris Review
10 Months ago
Stellaris review snippet How strategic does combat in Stellaris feel?
Not very. Your ship design determines everything, so it's more like a pre-determined game of rock/paper/scissors. And if you have equivalent designs, then numbers win the day. There's no fine control over fleets, special abilities, or anything like that. But it does look pretty.
sign in to comment
Droniac Avatar
Droniac replied to 14 questions on the Dirty Bomb Review
1 Year ago
Dirty Bomb review snippet How good an FPS is Dirty Bomb?
Splash Damage have been trying to make a worthy successor to Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory for more than a decade. And with Dirty Bomb they've finally managed it. In most ways this is a flat-out superior game, making it easily the best free shooter there is... alongside the new Unreal Tournament. It does still need some work (bug-fixing / map variety) and it's still not as good as Return to Castle Wolfenstein, mainly due to gun-play and slower (more forgiving / modern) pacing. But all in all this is a damn fine effort and easily the best modern competitive team-based multiplayer shooter out there. Yes, far better than Team Fortress 2. Some people will prefer CS:GO for its lower barrier to entry, more deliberate pacing, or more casual emphasis on teamwork. Dirty Bomb is far more fast-paced and skill-based (or twitch-oriented) and dives far deeper into varying objectives, player roles, and an immense requirement for teamwork. Initially daunting, but that's the way a real FPS should be (imo?).
sign in to comment