I’d say I’m not a fan of their main monopoly getting bigger. Hardware lock or not, I want MS competing on par with PS, Nintendo, even though I cringe at buying a console for a game. This field got a bit leveled due to Sony giving up on some past exclusives (with a tasty price, nonetheless), but I just don’t trust a personal PC monopolist to be the one to dismantle the current dumbness and taking the higher ground from the very start.

Btw, I now recall some future Rouge Alley handheld version on Windows got announced as xbox-branded, with a probable verification status. It’s not a bad decision at their part, but I feel like that’s not only sneaking into another niche-move, but also a move to bite Valve, still-irrelevant on general console market, before they take some ground with their, ugh, Leenix or something.

They tried to push w11-xbox compatibility to push all consoles aside, and I can’t say if it works and if it means stonks, but I can see the current lead not being enthusiastic about R&Ding and producing new hardware, exclusive games. OEM software is a stable bird feeder, and AI integration is their next big king, so they just fixed their position in gaming market by buying several big companies and seemingly quit plans on console market. They are too big and to diverse to fall, but I think ditching a brand equal to sweaty Halo parties of the past and all these long-going console holywars wouldn’t bring much in the perspective of years, not several quarter past today.

Much more relevant are the last two numbers in nvidia classification. A 2060 is miles behind a 1080. The first 2 numbers just represent the generation, not how “strong” it is.

I know what these numbers are. I thought it’s obvious from my comments.

1060 was always an entry level gpu, and is outclassed by even modern integrated graphics.

1050 was an entry level garbage of this generation, going as low as 3GB of VRAM, while 1060 got 4-6GBs. The latter is not in the best position now, after 3060 dropped, and affordable VRAM got into 10GB+ territory, but it’s still capable of enduring tasks on it’s budget. 4060 and 5060 didn’t brought as much to the table as 10xx-30xx jump did after failed 20xx imho.

Since new vcards are still trapped in an overprice bubble, used 1060s are still nice, especially coupled together. And I doubt that this discrete card is worse than integrated graphics of, say, 13gen i5 Intel, that is, by defenition, uses a part of availiable RAM rather than having it’s own soldered-in VRAM of the next gen, and also steals computational power from the CPU, that is rarely a bottleneck but cpu-heavy tasks still happen. In games, it’s titles like Vermintide 2 that exhaust mid-range machines by calculating horde logic.

Source: I do live VJing and occasional v-render on client’s hardware, ranging from sexy 5080 speeds to vcardless trash setups, and just a couple of days ago I was forced to use a 730 vcard that could hardly handle OBS and projecting software at the same time.

1060 is certainly low end, which is the card you mentioned. 1080 (ti) might still be considered higher end, but the 1060 has been called low end years ago.

Nvidia had a lot of cards this generation, and 1060 in 6gb variant is not as bad as you think. It’s two generations behind, because 20xx were sometimes even worse, and 50xx-40xx changes weren’t that significant as 10xx-30xx were. 10xxs won’t produce top gfxs in the recent games, but most time it’s not them being outdated, but devs fucking it up. And you casually ignored that most PCs have something like an Intel Integrates 13100 instead that barely rebders Dota.

What? That doesn’t make the models of the character and scenery any less 3D. Are we looking at the same game?

I suggest you to watch one video on original Resident Evil and how it was designed. Devs managed to do hd gfxs because they could prerender some bits, and others only existed in a POV of the player. With most of the gameplay focused on one side-scrolling perspectieve, devs limited things they need to render (like the world behind you doesn’t exist), and could’ve cut the resources required. I don’t know if they did so, but 12gb ram and 1060 are still ubreasonable.

don’t get what you’re trying to say. Yes, an 11 year old game performs fine on 10 year old hardware. What does this have to do with an unreleased, unoptimised, modern game?

Skipping over beta condition this game is in, I want this game to provide anything of value for resources consumed. I proposed an old game that does all of that in 3d, and I’m wondering why a 2d game can’t do the same.

But most importantly, it’s still a WIP.

To make it clear, I’m not barking at that dev, but at the industry that gets pushed further and further in reqs without any visible upsides.

Optimisation for lower end PCs will probably happen last.

10xx is still not a lower-end PC. Most modern PCs in the world don’t have discrete graphics card and instead use integrated Intel/AMD solutions. Buying a PC or a laptop with a discrete one is 30% addition to an already bloated price tag, so unless you know you need one you can skip it. And, unsurprisingly so, 10xx show themselves still capable, although lacking raytracing stuff.

2D in gameplay, but it’s a 3D game

No, it isn’t. The gameplay is tied to two dimensions and it lets devs leave out everything but a thin line of scenery that serves the 2d perspective.

1060 is almost 10 years old

And Sunset Overdrive is 11 yo, yep, and it’s a full 3d game with similar gfxs where you can actually navigate these three dimensions hopping through it’s map. Most of the game happens from a zoomed out pov, so there’s probably even less need for computational power and caching if they downsized textures for these scenes acorrdingly.

There is still no reason to exceed these demands, unless you go all into raytracing, VR or 4k high fps range. The most probable blunders are UE5 and lack of optimization. For a game that doesn’t call itself as a groundbreaking AAA expirience, these reqs feel misplaced.

Looks genuinely fun but omfg 2d platformer with 1060 and 12gb ram as low specs? Five years from now I wouldn’t be able to play a modern three-in-a-row browser game it seems.

From the other side, I felt gameplay was very underwhelming for that game. Navigating it and fighting felt boring and repetitive. And I do like boring and repetitive games.

Script-search, presumption of age, kid-sniffing and self-snitching.

I shared your confusion.

Now I’m curious if one can pull that off with simple games if features like high refresh rate and wireless thrown off. Also, price. With that ‘Memory LCD’ of theirs, it costs $100 per unit as per their Twitter.

14 days standby clock, 8 hours active

That’s what PD team claims for 740 mAh battery, it is what cheap mp3 players now have\consume. If there is a space to optimize it further, we’d see even better numbers, but I’m not confident this crank or little solar panel on the surface (whole back panel?) could make it autonomous. Yet, the idea of a handheld that LOVES sunlight is tempting. And, also, the idea of games that are built around slow and infrequent refresh like those minigames on e-books.

Kill it with fire.

The one with you naked since it defies half of the purpose.