After spending the past week reading up on everything related to the new game platform OnLive, I've found myself in a interesting predicament. I've seen the videos and read the reviews, and like the feedback I'm hearing on the software. I'm hopeful this new service works because it would be great for gamers everywhere, and would especailly be great for me as a college student. There is just one thing I can't figure out.
Yet another leak for the ASUS ROG Ally X points towards as much as 8 hours of battery, but how does that compare to the competition?
Honestly, I really like this updated version. But it doesn't solve the biggest flaw that the original had for me: the Z1 Extreme APU. Yes, it's an extremely powerful part, but it is not part of AMD's Adrenalin driver update program, so it's dependent on Asus for driver updates. And unfortunately, Asus doesn't have a stellar record of support for their devices.
Up to 8 hours basically just means the least demanding games. AAA gaming at highest wattage would probably be about 2-3 hours which is good compared to just about 1 hour with the current ally. The OLED Deck can do about 2-3hrs.
With much less performance so that makes sense.
The Steamdeck shines at the lower TDP end but gets absolutely mopped at the high end.
Similar longevity with much better performance is a big win for the Ally X
They used to be the best when it comes to motherboards, now I will never buy anything from them again.
Nope. The only improvements I want to hear is better customer support. Otherwise, I can't be bothered.
Jack writes: "Our guide to the best GPUs for Homeworld 3 talks you through some of today's best options from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel - for various budgets."
opinion piece? it's an advertisement and these articles shouldn't be here.
Advertisement on top of advertisements
They don't make games like this anymore.
Too dated in my book. The AI is way too unpredictable to be acceptable today. It's definitely a game of its time.
Agreed with those sentiments. The quality of the CPU controlled characters make or break a stealth game and they are pretty poor in all the Splinter Cell games by today's standard. This is what led me to playing Spies vs Mercs all the time in later games just to get a better stealth experience from a real person. Arguably Sony are making better stealth games albeit not Tom Clancy stuff.
You should stick with fortnite or one of the countless bloodborne style games then. What a joke.
I had a good time with the game. It is a product of its time. But when it came out it was a must have game for a lot of people. I wish Ubisoft would make another game in the series or at least a reboot.
They are making a remake, I think. I loved the original game when it was released, but I tried to play it again in recent years and just couldn't get on with it. The same with the older Hitman games.
Yeah chaos theory still holds up though I gotta say. If you’re a fan of the series I highly suggest you go back to that one. Ubi has said they are remaking sc for “modern audiences”. I don’t have a lot of faith for the future of that company
Due to the lack of modern stealth games, and me constantly playing the MGS series, I've been looking for alternative stealth games to play, and went back and re-played the SC series recently. I wouldn't call SC1 or SC:PT masterpieces, there are AI issues, they're very much trial-and-error games, and that can lead to a lot of frustration. I also found the stories in this series to be boring, uninteresting, and just sloppily told. Cinematics are also of poor quality for both in-game scenes and CG cut-scenes, the soundtrack didn't leave any impression on me either.
Chaos Theory is better, but there was still a lot of room for improvement, and Double Agent (old gen ver.) was a sloppy mess that ended up a regression from CT. But still, at least they tried back then, these days Ubi-junk doesn't even try to make good games!
Jesus christ really who approves hhg stories. They are all crap, I suspect that the people from hhg themselves approve their own stories.
Blueberries make me itch.
I dont think any dev talks about their own hardware because the consumer isn't supposed to worry about that, you're just supposed to trust they have enough to satisfy you and make it playable. It's like PSP remote play...you're not supposed to ask if the PSP can render PS3's graphics because that's not what remote play does. The PS3 takes care of everything and all the PSP does is show it on its screen and you can control it with the PSP buttons. All OnLive is doing is enabling you to play it with OnLive's own hardware and the only thing your PC needs to do is be able to show video and control what's on the video. As far as hardware recommendations, you're only supposed to be required to need a REALLY good internet connection if you want to make the game look decent on your screen
What hardware they have on their end is the least of the concerns. How they are compressing and how are they avoiding lag is the magic wand waving they are doing now. It doesn't really matter what system they have as long as it can play the game at an acceptable frame rate.
What I would be more interested is at what levels will the games be ran? Sure, it can run Crysis, but will I be able to play it at max graphical settings like a high end rig? Will graphics settings scale forward and back when more or less people get on the service? That's what I'm curious about.
I would hate to be playing games at uber low settings due to server strain.