Their AAA games are mid so I suspect their 'quadruple-A' games are also mid. Price 'em how you want, I'll pass anyway, thanks Yves.

One of the best games ever made. Not sure if Switch is going to be the best way to experience it, but as long as it works properly and runs well enough it's a must-play in my books.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are EVs, have electric motors, and qualify when you talk about "power generation with Hydrogen" and "versatility of electricity". The hydrogen in the tanks is fed into an anode and oxygen into a cathode to power a circuit and drive an electric motor. It's an EV, but the 'battery' is hydrogen. FCEVs could be the key to shoring up a lot of conventional EV shortcomings; lithium-ion waste, electricity grid load, and lifespan, for instance. Combine that with the ICE vehicle in question in the article; Hydrogen ICE engines could provide routes for retrofitting existing combustion vehicles, adding additional demand to improve supply infrastructure and improve green hydrogen supply. These are well-warranted experiments for Toyota to be undertaking on the global stage; as crucial as any EV battery investigation!

Arakane Austin clearly didn't want to make that game as evidenced by their 70% dev exodus during development, and you really need a dedicated dev team to achieve a "redemption arc". This is likely another head office decision made with no understanding of their development team(s) or how to actually achieve it. I'm not holding my breath.

This meme reads more like slackware won't do anything you want it to do...

I'm interested to see it took this long tbh

man that bald english dude has to be losing his damn mind rn

I don't think it's unfair to point out that many of the people who were interested in Starfield leading up to launch thought they were getting more of a space sim than they did, proceeded to look for alternatives, and NMS was there being pretty good at what it does now. The OP article demonstrates this and is not a comparison between the games. In my case, Starfield just reminded me that NMS exists and I decided I'd rather be playing it. Fundamentally comparing the games is ridiculous, but it's no surprise that NMS ended up in the conversation.

Really? You can't fathom how someone would consider NMS a better game? Both games are barely comparable other than using space as a backdrop. Judging by the reaction online, it seems like many people were lead to believe that Starfield would be a space sim and came up wanting when it was more of a sci-fi Fallout, with mostly optional engagement with the space elements. For those people, I can see merit in recommending they check out No Man's Sky, which has a shallow, bit widely-spread space simulation to engage with.

I don't think it's useful to try and argue which game is better, but I would much rather play No Man's Sky any day of the week. Bethesda RPGs have long lost their luster for me since the Oblivion days, and now just stand as a testament of disappointing writing, stagnant technology and under-baked systems. Starfield does not show any meaningful signs of breaking the norm.

Andrew Wilson and my personal definition of 'very exciting' likely differ greatly, so I'm not going to pay attention to anything until we see the products. I suspect he is very excited to make a lot of money on a bunch of new Star Wars games.

Yep, here you go: []

For what it's worth, NVIDIA's failings on Linux tend to be mostly in the desktop experience. As a compute device driven by cuda and not responsible for the display buffer, they work plenty good. Enterprise will not be running hardware GUI or DEs on the machines that do the AI work, if at all.