Vilham

It wasn't an unreasonable question at all. The answer to it is pretty easy too. Its "yeah we will aim to do that in future". What a ridiculously silly take, but then again you have shown your hand a few times in the thread already.

Don't bother using a tool that isn't for a game. You aren't going to learn anything if you don' have any mechanics with which to build for.

Never played timesplitters, burn the heretic.

Finished Iron Harvest, would not recommend it tbh. its waaaaaaaaay slower than company of heroes in terms of eco/unit building. The campaign has only a few interesting missions and its massively drawn out, literally 40 hours but not very exiciting. Finished destroy all humans, would recommend at a lowish price if you havent played it before. Was pretty fun tbh, gameplay still holds up ok. Finished Carrion, was ok, would recommend at a lowish price, not really a metroidvania as the game is actually pretty linear which was a little disappointing. Finished siege survival, was quite

Nah just an old school ps4, I played way after release though, so maybe they optimized a bunch of stuff.

I experienced basically zero FPS stuttering unless it was super insane with dozens of explosions happening.

Yeah it was probably my GOTY last year.

Also massive shortages on rare earth metals.

Yeah I'm pretty hyped for Lumen. Fully dynamic cheapish lighting is amazing.

Don't care, has sausage dog.

Sorry, I'm referring to enemy level scaling. Where enemies just level to whatever level you are, meaning you don't really get gated from areas by enemies that are too hard. Personally really dislike it. I like my games to gate me from areas in natural ways that if I am good enough I can get past and find really overly powerful stuff for my level. The nice thing about subnautica is that isnt not really metrovania as there is no key/ability gating its purely how long you can swim underwater for and the crush depth for vehicles. Technically you can go deeper, you just would need to be super

Yeah, if they aren't making any improvements to how collisions are handled then their marketing is just that. Nanite sounds great for people making nice looking scenes. If anything making games is going to be MORE complex for the overall team as it removes a constraint that tied collisions and render together previously. Now you either have uber high res complex geometry with simple collisions which is just going to look bad in motion and gameplay (which doesn't add any more work) or this new visual fidelity is going to require you to author more complex collisions to match these unconstrained

Blackdog if you are referring to the level design principles, basically 02 and heat act as gates. So you have access to certain areas and within those areas you will find upgrades that will allow you to access deeper or stay in the cold for longer. So basically the world is gated by the upgrades/resources in different areas. Its a really good mechanic. Wish more open world was like this. Gothic 3 is still great in regards to that, enemy level gates you from areas. I really hate the modern trend of dynamic level scaling.

True, which is fine for something like a single player game. Collisions generally need to be loaded in on the server at all times and is something that is tested against constantly to let the server be authoritative (assuming you don't want loads of hacking). So super complex player collisions will decrease server performance and therefore increase costs on servers (I actually think this is why the art style in games like overwatch is so good, the map effectively can be super simple in terms of collisions but still looks really good). So I assume the player collision in these maps need

Am really interested to see how collisions are being handled in these insanely detailed worlds. A multiplayer game with lots of players doing collision tests against this kind of geometry must be expensive as fuck. Or they have just offloaded modelling time onto making collisions instead...