Am I crazy or reading the wrong info or are you being hyperbolic when you say California has "insane" income taxes?
As an example, the effective rate when making $200k is 25% including federal taxes. That's great. You get to live in a productive and supportive society. The only issue I see is that housing is expensive and $150k, as much as it can support a comfortable lifestyle, would be insufficient to ALSO buy a home. But what we're talking about here is a separate issue from housing.
(your state taxes when making $100k would only be $2k, to preempt that retort)
The tone around "high taxes" are set by the uber-rich. Hilariously, most of them borrow against their shares to fund their lifestyles (where the interest is tax-deductible!) if they're even still resident in CA.
That being said, California is an ungovernable mess where state-constitutional amendments dictate a huge percentage of taxation and spending. It'd otherwise be a great place to live if real estate prices were somehow brought into line, but alas...
It's probably just a general comment for folks who don't understand CA property taxes. I've lived here my whole home-buying life, so it never crosses my mind to look at the Zillow property tax figure when doing my mental maths on whether I can afford something, but if you lived in an area where the figure in Zillow actually means something to the buyer, you might be in for a surprise in CA.
Here, it's just an easy 1%, so the math isn't hard. I'm not sure if other states have highly variable rates on a county-by-county basis, or if other states also tend to have consistent rates within their borders.
In Illinois, how property is valued and taxed seems pretty obscure, and may involve witchcraft.
The rate on my tax bill is 6.03%. But that's on a "net taxable value" that's about 40% of what I paid for the place 15 years ago, and maybe 25% of what I could get for the place now. So the rate is effectively 2.5% of what I paid, or 1.4% of what I could get. The total tax has also gone up 26% since 2020, increasing by more each year, but I don't know whether they've raised the rate each year or the valuation.
It's probably possible to find out how it works, but there's not much point. It is what it is, so you pay it or leave. No one lives in Illinois for the tax rates.
Ah yes, the ZIRP induces decompression of assets prices - hopefully for people buying into the extreme ongoing expenses, we will see serious inflation over the next years.
If there is not inflation and value compressions kicks in, then there are some people who will be ... burdened.
this concerns me given what I've seen generated by these tools. In 10? 5? 1? year(s) are we going to see an influx of CVEs or hiring of Senior+ level developers solely for the purpose of cleaning up these messes?
Insofar as CVEs issued for proprietary software, I would expect that the owning organization would not be inclined to blame AI code unless they think they can pass the buck.
But as for eventually having to hire senior developers to clean up the mess, I do expect that. Most organizations that think they can build and ship reliable products without human experts probably won’t be around long enough to be able to have actual CVEs issued. But larger organizations playing this game will eventually have to face some kind of reckoning.
Looking at the other side of the coin, I'm hoping that the proliferation of unsafe code would lead to more investment in vulnerability testing tooling, and particularly in reducing false positives by generating potential exploits. Having better security testing would be a massive boon to the industry regardless of whether we use AI to write the code.
lol everyone saw this coming. People just want to be told that they are geniuses, all their ideas are great, they are funny, etc. It's literally a yes-man.
I guess so. I've had two previous fitbits and I believe those track every second during exercise and every five minutes otherwise. But those watches would still only get 5-7 days of battery life.
Hence my skepticism that this feature can be offered and still get 4x more life than that.
I mean that is what normal people care about, too. If the game is a stuttery mess, it is more negatively perceived than if the game is graphically meh imo. _As someone who does care about framerate_, I do what you are getting at, though.
I'm curious what you think of games at low frame rate for artistic intention. I'm making a game and locking it at 30fps not for technical limitations, but because I actually like feel of it compared to the overly smooth high FPS. The game I'm making isn't fast paced so it feels appropriate. I sometimes lock my games to even 14fps.
I don't think I've ever played a game where I found it to feel better at a lower framerate. The lower the FPS, the highter the latency of input response and the lower temporal resolution makes it harder to track movement, particularly rotational control of a camera.
Artistic intention I do understand. I played your game and you're specifically evoking a low-fi aesthetic. The noise in particular might look noiser at higher framerates, damaging the era it's trying to evoke.
Though I have to wonder if there might be a way to split the difference, to render out the scene at low FPS and reproject the camera at a higher framerate, similar to how most VR implementations work. That way the aesthetic would be largely unchanged, if the camera isn't moving it would be identical, but you'd get that much nicer input response.
I recently played South of Midnight, which is one of the best games I've played in years. I'm really surprised it didn't get more attention. I think it has the best sound design of any game I've ever played and beautiful art and story throughout.
It uses a stop motion style for character animations, which is pretty close to low frame rate, I'd estimate around 15fps (at least the way it was implemented there). I have to say it was the one part of the game that I disliked. I could see the purpose, I could see that it fit well with the general art direction. I just found it very uncomfortable and tiring to look at after a while. Fortunately they were smart enough to acknowledge this with a menu setting to disable it.
If you do decide to artistically lock your game to a low frame rate, please do your players a favor and allow them to unlock it.
Judging from your video, it depends on how long I am supposed to play this. If it is a few hours thing I see no issue but it could be tiring to stare at this for too long. I dig the aesthetic you are trying to create, though.
In the 14fps one, 14fps white noise is probably better than 60 fps white noise.
FPS locking is not the right solution (although it is an easy one). Your animations are the ones that should be animated on twos, or threes, or fours, or whatever feels right for your game. That applies to animations, particles, etc. This leaves you the option to let other things run as fast as needed to feel smooth (for example: I do like the leaves falling slowly, the book opening, etc. Camera panning & moving would feel infinitely better at a 60 FPS.)
Unfortunately, playing a game is very different experience to watching a movie: take the example of Ghost of Tsushima, that despite having a Kurosawa mode, still accepts 60FPS and over.
I may likely be limiting my audience since many people are used to 60fps and higher now. I'm slightly strange in that I think on a visual level, it just does not match my intent as I actually prefer the lack of visual clarity in art.
I do have a fear that most people won't see the intent and instead just see a badly performing game (I have not got this critique yet in every other game I have with intentional low frames yet, but then again my audience cares less about performance and more about the experience). Here is the game for reference that I am locking to 30fps.
It’s not about badly performing for me, but reality.
Low frame rates on modern display technology make me physically ill if there is a viewport component.
The “smearing” of the image induces nausea for whatever reason. I do not suffer this from CRT displays, just modern ones and have done since LCD effectively arrived. Though I can tolerate it on teeny tiny screens like handhelds interestingly enough.
This is a point I never considered, thanks for sharing. Accessibility is important. Makes me want exhibit my games using CRTs for the ideal experience. This discussion has me thinking about the divide between VR players that experience motion sickness and the ways games try and don't try to fix this.
It might be unrealistic to exhibit games on CRTs if they aren't going to be played on CRTs - if you've got a lot of headroom with the 30fps target, is it worth trying a subtle CRT emulation shader? Especially with people frequently having 120fps+ monitors, it seems like a subtle fadeoff could be made to work.
P.S. I thought your original question was madness, but now that you've posted your projects I can totally see why you're targeting lower framerates. I really like the mood, have wishlisted TO:RI
That was indeed snarky. Also depending on the game and style lower frame rates can be perfectly fine and possibly preferable. Not every game is a 240fps fps. Movies are still 24fps, games have done 24fps for a more cinematic look and some animation is even done at 12fps (Spiderverse was animated on the twos)
Spiderverse was animated on twos for specific characters in specific scenes. Movies have to be very careful when moving the camera not to turn into a blurry mess. With higher frame rates you can move the camera much more freely and the audience will still be able to see what is happening.
One high profile game has done that, The Order 1886, and it was widely agreed upon that it was the worst part of its "cinematic look" (which 99% of it was reached with simply letterboxing, film grain and other effects).
Movies that are 24fps do not have very fast moving cameras like games do. Animations that are done at 12FPS still run at 60FPS: I can move around a given character, and for 5 frames, from all different angles, they'll still be on their own animation frame. I won't, however, be stuck for 80ms waiting to be allowed to change my position.
Many people seem to really enjoy the experience. I believe I can get away with this specifically because I don't care to make my games fun. They are art pieces made with game engines in a sense.
>I mean that is what normal people care about, too.
Depends on how you define normal. I think it's much more likely that the number of people who care about it deeply is extremely small - a small sub-group within the group of people who see gaming as their main hobby.
My sense is that frame rate is a buzzy topic for nerds to nerd out over. The same way that nerds use to nerd out over RAM. Talking about it seems like a high effort status signal. But those can be swapped out for other things easily.
But it is possible, and i have seen code like this (admittedly, not as complex) in production. When you have code like this is really hard to know what is really going on. Its SUPER rare you need flexibility like this in your type system, and as we all know when its doable, people will abuse it like crazy.
As an example, the effective rate when making $200k is 25% including federal taxes. That's great. You get to live in a productive and supportive society. The only issue I see is that housing is expensive and $150k, as much as it can support a comfortable lifestyle, would be insufficient to ALSO buy a home. But what we're talking about here is a separate issue from housing.
(your state taxes when making $100k would only be $2k, to preempt that retort)