options for gaming
2019-Aug-20, Tuesday 09:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mellowtiggerI play computers games. I play them a lot. For about a decade now, I've also played my games on Linux instead of Windows. Early on, the options were few. Nowadays, there are more top-rank games to play on Linux than even I have time to play them. Instead of playing on Windows or Linux or the various consoles, though, there are interesting options available now.
Steam Link:
It's a great idea, and I'm sorry that it didn't work out better for them. It's sort of like a Google Chromecast for your games. You run the Steam platform on whatever is your main computer (Windows or Linux) then broadcast the display to your television instead of your computer monitor, and you use their Steam controller for input.
Steam Machine:
Another great idea that didn't earn them any real money. It's a small Linux computer to replace your traditional game console. Steam provides the operating system, any company provides the computer to run it. You run your games the Steam machine, and Steam ensures game compatibility for their platform. Too bad it didn't sell many of them, but at least the Linux support is really great now.
Amazon Lumberyard:
Amazon's product wants to use its big server farms to replace the servers used by standard online game companies. They run the whole thing, companies program their game in Amazon's game engine (a modified CryEngine technology), then Amazon runs the servers. It sure simplifies a lot of the logistics of rolling out worldwide online games. Not many titles are using it, though. In fact, the only name I recognize is my long-awaited Star Citizen.
Google Stadia:
Google's new product is a direct competitor to consoles, Steam, Amazon, and all of the other platforms. You get a virtual machine on Google's server where you run your game. (You purchase your game specifically for use on Stadia, not any other platform.) The display is sent over the internet to any device you want: computer screen, tv display, tablet, phone. Anything. Assuming you have the necessary bandwidth for the display, then it really is a challenge to all of the old ways of playing. It remains to be seen if the lag makes games unplayable when fast responses are required. Lag will be caused by transmission to your screen, waiting for your human hands to respond to what you see, then waiting for the controller to transmit reactions back to Google servers. That's a lot of lag. We'll see if it works. Another big downside is that it seems to favor games designed for controllers instead of keyboards. I generally dislike games designed for controllers, but... I may give it a try. There is already a long list of games to consider.
Nintendo Switch:
I mention this console only because it's the first one that I've wanted to buy. I intended to buy an upgraded "Pro" model this year, but Nintendo defied all expectations by not giving us one (yet). Still waiting.
Steam Link:
It's a great idea, and I'm sorry that it didn't work out better for them. It's sort of like a Google Chromecast for your games. You run the Steam platform on whatever is your main computer (Windows or Linux) then broadcast the display to your television instead of your computer monitor, and you use their Steam controller for input.
Steam Machine:
Another great idea that didn't earn them any real money. It's a small Linux computer to replace your traditional game console. Steam provides the operating system, any company provides the computer to run it. You run your games the Steam machine, and Steam ensures game compatibility for their platform. Too bad it didn't sell many of them, but at least the Linux support is really great now.
Amazon Lumberyard:
Amazon's product wants to use its big server farms to replace the servers used by standard online game companies. They run the whole thing, companies program their game in Amazon's game engine (a modified CryEngine technology), then Amazon runs the servers. It sure simplifies a lot of the logistics of rolling out worldwide online games. Not many titles are using it, though. In fact, the only name I recognize is my long-awaited Star Citizen.
Google Stadia:
Google's new product is a direct competitor to consoles, Steam, Amazon, and all of the other platforms. You get a virtual machine on Google's server where you run your game. (You purchase your game specifically for use on Stadia, not any other platform.) The display is sent over the internet to any device you want: computer screen, tv display, tablet, phone. Anything. Assuming you have the necessary bandwidth for the display, then it really is a challenge to all of the old ways of playing. It remains to be seen if the lag makes games unplayable when fast responses are required. Lag will be caused by transmission to your screen, waiting for your human hands to respond to what you see, then waiting for the controller to transmit reactions back to Google servers. That's a lot of lag. We'll see if it works. Another big downside is that it seems to favor games designed for controllers instead of keyboards. I generally dislike games designed for controllers, but... I may give it a try. There is already a long list of games to consider.
Nintendo Switch:
I mention this console only because it's the first one that I've wanted to buy. I intended to buy an upgraded "Pro" model this year, but Nintendo defied all expectations by not giving us one (yet). Still waiting.
no subject
Date: 2019-Aug-21, Wednesday 06:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-Aug-22, Thursday 01:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-Aug-21, Wednesday 03:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2019-Aug-22, Thursday 01:18 am (UTC)Speaking for myself: I'd rather play games solo on my pc. I devote a whole lot of time to it. I don't like the combat, per se, so much as the tactical/logistics challenges. I like the building/crafting games that make players seek new resources and protect them from "the bad guy" who seeks to use them against you. Yes, it is time-consuming, but more importantly it is attention-consuming while doing it. No time to think about real-life stressors. It is distraction and calm from the storm.
As for online versus offline: That's really the fault of developers and the companies that fund them. I would much (much) rather play offline just on my computer, companies see boatloads of cash in online play. Either in recurring monthly fees which are nice and predictable income or in microtransactions and gambling (which I think is encouraged in part by "keeping up with the Joneses" in the online social environment), so development companies create this stuff against the interests of many players.
Most big online games try to sell their "endgame raiding" as the best fun to be had, but that's precisely the type of gameplay that I avoid: crowds of people on scheduled events performing scripted/reliable actions... how boring and so much like having a day job. When there's nothing left to do but that, then I quit the game.