![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8c3e6151-3142-4fae-ac7e-95626586f318.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/2665e448-91d9-484d-919d-113c9715fc79.png)
Not that I remember, true that it didn’t handle the last gen consoles, and that it was marketed as quite demanding
Sadly “minimum” or “recommended” just tells us the game runs, not that it runs well
Not that I remember, true that it didn’t handle the last gen consoles, and that it was marketed as quite demanding
Sadly “minimum” or “recommended” just tells us the game runs, not that it runs well
thats was just a loud minority talking about super max setting with Raytracing and 4k
I beg to differ: Adnan Khashoggi, a famous arms dealer, considered one the richest mans of the 1980s, active on the Iran-Contra affair. Viktor Bout, famous russian arms dealer active on the FARC. Sir Basil Zaharoff, greek arms dealer active on the Balkan Wars
And these are just a few most notorious ones.
As I said, when a war starts, someone is already winning, it’s a sad but true reality.
Seems I’m getting downvoted. Just to be clear, I condemn war and armed conflicts, If i could make so, no guns would ever be fired.
My point is, it’s pointless to argue about the “should be” or “could be”, I’m just stating the actual, current state of matters.
There’s ALWAYS a winner, in fact, If a war started, someone is already winning, be It one of the involved parties, be It a guns supplier or a manufacturing plant making tanks.
It’s naive to think that, people with power to decide what to do in a war, will prioritize a “good and moral war”, over getting what they want from It.
Maybe you and I can’t see any advantage over an attack and label It stupid, but it is what it is, and maybe the actual intent is not clear to us.
Anyways, war is bad, but don’t be naive.
It’s morally wrong to do so. At the end of the day, like every single other war in the human history sadly , the right side is the winning one, be It bombing power plants, hospitals or houses.
if you call a cell X
I think it is being divided like X/2, not X/0.5
that came out great!
I think the problem is just that, the game is… okay, not bad or good, just okay, unremarkable and forgettable.
If you want good sales you need to do something innovative and interesting, or something cliché but really well done.
Taking a look at Doom 2016 (also a single player shooter) we can see the core gameplay: Shoot demons, Pick up ammo, Shoot more demons. But it’s crafted so masterfully that you spend dozens or hundreds of hours doing just that.
Now with this game that I actually forgot the name mid comment, It’s… well you get the ideia.
The thing is what is the consensus of “runs well”? Is it a FPS constant? No glitches? Fast loads?
My point is, a game can come shitty and run a constant 30 fps under the “recommended” since that’s what they thought was appropriate
Is a gray area that should be more descriptive, not sure why downvote me