Search the Community

Hello guys. Posting my first thread after years of watching Linus invite people over here. I was thinking of making a gaming/work PC. The target budget is as in the title, around £2000 +-500. Location is UK. I can source the component prices myself from dealers/amazon locally, so that isn't the main problem. The main problem is inter compatibility and modifications to the list I compiled, to give you an idea of what I want. Direct purpose of build: gaming(X series of games - space flight sims, witcher 3, fallout 4, gta 5, loads of old school games, Destiny 2, Halo wars 2, Dawn of War 3) Secondary purpose: work (2D and 3D cad programs now, 3D rendering in the future - will upgrade the graphics card by then) I will link 1 monitor(cough 49"TV) to it now, but will go up to 3 proper monitors within 1.5 years As an OS, I was thinking of Win 10 (maybe pro, but I don´t think it´s worth it) with a secondary SSD with a linux tails as backup. Reason for upgrading? it´s easy to upgrade thin air and a 3 year old multimedia laptop Right. now for the config I´ve picked: Asus ROG Maximus IX Hero Intel Z270 (Socket 1151) DDR4 ATX Motherboard Intel Core i7-7700K 4.2GHz (Kaby Lake) Socket LGA1151 Processor - Retail be quiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 CPU Cooler MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Gaming X RGB 8192MB GDDR5X PCI-Express Graphics Card Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 PC4-25600C16 3200MHz Dual Channel Kit - Black (CMK16GX4M2B32) be quiet! Dark Power Pro P11 850W '80 Plus Platinum' Modular Power Supply be quiet! Dark Base Pro 900 Full Tower Gaming Case - Black Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound (3.5g) WD Black 256GB PCIe SSD + 2TB Performance HDD Bundle 512GB SSD 850 PRO SATA 6Gbps 3D NAND Solid State Drive (MZ-7KE512BW) all of the above products are from overclockers uk, which is one of the main sites around the UK, but I can find the parts a bit cheaper on amazon, so like I said, pricing isn´t a must, unless you know a reputable cheap shop around here Please be gentle, as this is my first major build after 8 years of doing everything else except PCs Thank you so much for your time and attention, and in advance for your advises. Regards, Lucian.

Dear Filmnerds and camera freaks! Recently I have been on a trip to China, where I shot a video for a school project. It's called; Welcome to, Beijing. I would just love to hear you opinions on the video and some critisiscm would be nice. You can see the video here! I love honest opinions on all the things I can do better. Thanks in advance, Ruben Boerstoel.

Hi There! In my opinion you (Luke) are doing it wrong in the workshop. Love the concept, but would like to see the following things changed, it might change the output of the episodes. I'll go trough the 3 episodes: fan placement, cable management and thermal compound application. One thing I have to comment on all of the episodes is, that I would have used a hotter CPU, like the 4770K or 4790K, they put out way more heat, compared to the 6700K. The "Case Fans" episode I don't have any gripe with, you did it right (scientifically), you kept everything other than the amount of fans constant. Nice! Tho, still a hotter CPU, would be better. The "Cable Managment" episode I do have some comments on. First, you didn't check how the GPU boosted, and as we know it boosts when it has the cooling headroom, so it would be interesting to see how that changed as you stuffed stuff into the case. I personally have seen benefits from cleaning my cables, tho that was in a Lenovo M-series case (it's s**t). My CPU dropped about 5 C. And again the hotter CPU, please. The "Thermal Compound" episode I also don't have any gripe with, other than the hotter CPU. Hope you change the CPU to a hotter one and when checking GPU temps you log how much it boosts Regards A long time (lurking) viewer

So I was tasked with building a comp for a friend. I have the base specs of a good gaming comp that I drew up and I was looking for some constructive criticism. Trying to keep around $1600-$2000. http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/user/Gutyr999/saved/6dGH99 <Builld

To describe Jonathan Dankoff's job in the most digestible way, it's hard to do better than his Twitter bio, which explains in a sentence that he tries "to help people make their games better." Officially, Dankoff is a user research project manager at Ubisoft Montreal. And for the last five years, he's been focusing on Assassin's Creed at the studio behind games likeAssassin's Creed 3, Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag and Assassin's Creed Unity. About a year ago, he started specializing in something new. Along with his partner, Corey May, he now examines story through user testing. And all that really means is that he takes the criticism and suggestions that a bunch of people have and shares them with Ubisoft's writers before it's too late. Ultimately, Dankoff, who talked about what he's learned at a GDC 2015 session this week, sees himself as a helper. And as he was working on games in development, he realized something not that long ago: Narrative needs help. For reasons even the new process' creator doesn't understand, narrative was never part of the rigorous playtesting process that has become a hallmark of video game development. He decided to fix that. Game and mission design receive constant feedback, but story gets "next to none," he said. And that doesn't make any sense, given his understanding that narrative has become the second most important component for game reviews. Narrative tends to becomes fully integrated into games late in the development process, he said. At that point, scripts are locked, motion capture is done, voice over is recorded. Identifying story problems late into a project can make them somewhere between difficult and impossible to fix. So, to Dankoff, the solution seemed to be identifying these problems before it's too late. As everything does with hindsight, his process seems obvious. But it's new at Ubisoft, a company whose flagship Assassin's Creed series is steeped in lore. Now that he had a plan, a logical question followed: How do you formally review narrative? They couldn't use standard user testers because they "are not critics," Dankoff says. Their criticism often boils down to "Oh, I don't really like this part." And that's not particularly helpful for figuring out how to change a game's story and make it better. So he and May devised a solution, based on the belief that there's value in iteration. Playtesting shows that. The process of building a game and testing it with insiders and outsiders to find and fix mistakes is an integral part of making games. Narrative, they decided, needed the polish that gameplay got. That's why they devised the narrative review process, where project writers become Ubisoft's clients. Dankoff and May insert themselves into the process, calling attention to narrative in the messy middle where it's sometimes ignored. Their job is to listen to mixed signals and filter them for writers, who can use that feedback to make better games. At Ubisoft Montreal, they assemble a team made of two distinct parts: peers from the writing community as well as those who are "specifically not writers," like game design, level design and other leads. Through a systematic process, they review the narrative, analyze it and synthesize what they learn into a report. Their job is to "read, write, analyze and discuss," he said. Participants have 10 days (and, likely, an extension beyond that, because everybody's always so busy) to read a story synopsis, take notes, ask questions and provide notes. A longer questionnaire finishes the process. At Ubisoft, it's a very basic web form. You don't need "a fancy digital questionnaire," he told the audience. Next up is the analysis phase, where they look for consensus as well as divergent opinions, like comprehension of the story's continuity and character motivation. And then it's time to provide that information to the writers, in the least messy way possible. Dankoff warned against the multiplicative effects of negativity and suggested anyone employing this process should and end with positivity, saving the criticism for the middle. Think of it as a criticism sandwich. A formalized discussion follows. The writer can now ask questions of the reading group. And they can employ brainstorming sessions to workshop the problems people have identified. The results go into the first report as an addendum. The point is to provide meaningful feedback for a very important part of a game that hasn't been given the proper amount of feedback. They want to be early to act and discover problems and then provide a clear direction for fixing problems. They want, ultimately, to help everyone invest in the narrative, when it's easy to make changes. They want to do it long before they'd have to get a voice actor to come back in the studio. Their narrative review process provides actionable feedback, and the document that comes from the process becomes ammunition for writers, when people want to change the story. Before he ended the talk, Dankoff made one thing very clear: The narrative review process is not story design by committee. "What I'm talking about is accountability," he said. It's a process that allows writers to "justify your actions much more easily." None of the games Dankoff and his writer cohort May have worked on for the last year have come out, so he was careful not to give away any Ubisoft secrets. But he believes the process already provided benefits. There is a writer (on an unspecified game) who had no idea that a problem existed until the review process pointed it out. Under the old process, that kind of thing might've been swept under the rug and uncovered when it was too late to fix. Another example took the opposite approach: A writer knew there was a problem, and the group worked to improve the part of the script without overriding the writer's intentions. He said he couldn't believe they were the first people to think of this. That's why he came to GDC: to share what now seems simple and obvious with fellow developers. OP: I've alwyas liked Ubisoft, but things have gone stale, as a gamer all i can wish is for a better game with better story that doesn't feel rushes like a bakery item, i hope ubisoft has learned their lesson over the years and get back to the roots, Prince of persia days were gold Source : http://www.polygon.com/2015/3/5/8140249/ubisoft-montreal-narrative-review-writers-clients-gdc-2015

Summary It’s not just Realms — Minecraft’s upcoming Player Chat Reporting feature in Java Edition is attracting major pushback from the game’s community for plans to restrict players from joining servers temporarily or entirely if a global suspension is issued. Players say the system is ripe for abuse. Player Chat Reporting About a week ago, Minecraft Snapshot 22w24a (a weekly development snapshot leading up to the Java 1.19.1 release) introduced a Player Chat Reporting system in the Social Interactions menu (accessed with the ‘P’ key). It allows players to report others for a wide variety of reasons. According to an official help document, it initially only seemed to apply to Realms (a type of server available to rent from Mojang, the game’s developers) and select Featured Servers. (Source) But as of the 1.19.1 Pre-Release 1 snapshot, we can see that the system also applies to independently-operated servers. In this snapshot, players on ordinary servers — not just Realms — have found themselves able to report one another, and this is corroborated by the change log in the official blog post. (Source) Until 1.19.1 is released, reports made with the system may not be reviewed since it is still under development. After selecting a player to report in the Social Interactions menu, the user is presented with some reasons to report: (images courtesy of Alco_Rs11) The user is then able to bring up a chat log to select the messages to report. There’s also a text field for adding additional detail to include with the report. Here are some strings extracted from the latest snapshot, showing a few of the related messages that may be shown: (Source) "gui.banned.title.temporary": "Account temporarily suspended" "gui.banned.title.permanent": "Account permanently banned" "gui.banned.description": "%s %s Learn more about your case at the following link. %s" "gui.banned.description.reason": "We recently received a report for bad behavior by your account. Our moderators have now reviewed your case and identified it as %s, which goes against the Minecraft Community Standards." "gui.banned.description.unknownreason": "We recently received a report for bad behavior by your account. Our moderators have now reviewed your case and identified that it goes against the Minecraft Community Standards." "gui.banned.description.temporary.duration": "Your account is temporarily suspended and will be reactivated in %s." "gui.banned.description.temporary": "%s Until then, you can’t play online or join Realms." "gui.banned.description.permanent": "Your account is permanently banned, which means you can’t play online or join Realms." The announcement thread on r/Minecraft for Pre-Release 1 was widely downvoted, and sits at 0 points with hundreds of comments — many of them critical. The official Feedback forum for Pre-Release 1 has met similar reception, with most responses critical of the Player Chat Reporting feature. 1.19.1 Pre-Release 1 update overviews on YouTube, such as slicedlime’s, are also filled with negative comments. Starting in version 1.19, cryptographic signatures are associated with every message sent in chat. Modrinth user Aizistral has created a mod, No Chat Reports, to strip these cryptographic signatures from chat messages. This disables the inbuilt Microsoft chat telemetry, and by extension, Player Chat Reporting functionality. My thoughts I recommend reading the comments on the Reddit thread. I think it’s wrong to impose new rules on communities which for years have had their own unique rules and moderation procedures. I don’t think this will go over well with anarchy servers or authority figures. Mass reporting is an issue all across video gaming, especially games with ranked modes. I’m mostly disappointed in the implementation. If it were opt-in for servers, or even opt-out, that’d be a huge improvement over having no control. I find it silly that you could be suspended for such things as discussing alcohol between people over 21, or swearing impulsively at a cheater in a minigame, or sarcastically breaking one of the reportable criteria, only for someone to take it seriously and get offended by it. I feel like this was not something Mojang wanted to do. I think that this, or at least the current implementation, was a strategic corporate decision. I can’t blame them for wanting to improve player safety. I can however blame them for being overly controlling. Sources 1) Minecraft.net official blog post about Snapshot 22w4a: MINECRAFT SNAPSHOT 22W4A 2) Minecraft Help page about Player Chat Reporting from when the feature was initially introduced: Why Have I Been Banned from Minecraft? 3) 1.19.1 Pre-Release 1 announcement thread on r/Minecraft: A 5-Minute Dance - Minecraft 1.19.1 Pre-release 1 Is Out! 4) Minecraft.net official blog post about 1.19.1 Pre-Release 1: MINECRAFT 1.19.1 PRE-RELEASE 1 5) The official feedback forum page for 1.19.1 Pre-Release 1: Let's talk about the latest Java Pre-Release! (1.19.1 Pre-Release 1) 6) A mod to block chat telemetry: No Chat Reports