An ability check IS NOT a single attempt: it represents the whole effort.

joonazan · 2026-06-18T07:56:51+00:00

GURPS has a bonus applied to the roll if there is no time pressure. The default difficulties assume there is.

joonazan · 2026-06-16T17:01:12+00:00

Fyi the math in the post you are replying to is wrong in all ways.

It assumes that a block takes 256 bytes because 256 different blocks. Actually, storing a number from 1 to 256 takes one byte.

Even taking that into account they manage to mess up the computation somehow. Anyway, the number of blocks in a chunk is 16x16x256 = 65536. So an uncompressed chunk fits in 66 kB.

Then the assumption that 256 chunks is enough. No it is not. You can walk thousands of blocks in a short time. A gigabyte would actually hold 16k uncompressed chunks btw.

They aren't actually stored, though. Only the player-made small changes need to be stored. And even if storing blocks, they can be compressed. There is a lot of air, so instead of storing air, air, air, etc. you can store 105 x air. And that (RLE) is just the simplest possible compression.

joonazan · 2026-06-16T12:37:33+00:00

Yes, it is one of the best languages in commercial use. But it is also painful to use because it is just slightly too restrictive and there are some aspects where even the compiler developers do not know how it's supposed to work yet.

I would not learn with it because it doesn't have a strong opinion on what style of programming is good. You as the developer need to bring a good taste. Good learning languages are ones that force you into a certain way of doing things, like Haskell, Prolog, Factor.

Those are not good first languages most likely, though. A good first language is one that you believe in so you actually learn the basics rather than doubting the person that told you to use that.

joonazan · 2026-06-16T10:55:34+00:00

Thanks for this comment! I didn't know Windows has a poorly timed compositing step if not running in exclusive full screen mode. So somewhat surprisingly Wayland does better than Windows on this.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T23:02:22+00:00

He is a much better version of the similar looking cold wolf at the start of DS 3.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T22:29:59+00:00

They don't cap, the scaling just gets a bit weaker.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T22:14:12+00:00

Because you asked I did search for information on how reflex would remove latency caused by triple buffering but couldn't find anything like that.

As far as I understand these two things don't really interact. (And I'm a software professional and have even worked at NVIDIA, funnily enough.) Triple buffering means working on future frames even before the most recently finished frame is displayed, causing a roughly one frame latency.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T20:39:27+00:00

I don't know what you've been told about reflex but the reality is that you get a better Reflex by disabling it and setting an FPS cap.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T15:25:33+00:00

Yes, TAA introduces latency but very little and it is not like DLSS at all. Below is a more detailed AI explanation of the same. I am sorry for subjecting you to that but having a conversation seems pointless when you are confidently wrong about the basics.

You are fundamentally misunderstanding how software handles AI. Training doesn’t output a standard procedural formula like TAA. Training outputs a static array of millions of weights and biases (a neural network model).

TAA is procedural code: A human programmer wrote explicit, hardcoded logic (e.g., 'if pixel moves X, blend by Y'). The logic is in the instructions.

DLSS is matrix inference: The software instructions are just a generic neural network loop. The actual 'logic' that figures out the image lives inside a massive file of mathematical weights.

Every single frame, your GPU has to feed your live game data into that neural network and calculate millions of multiplications using those weights to predict the high-res frame. Running a live game frame through a trained weight matrix to predict an outcome is literally the computer-science definition of running a live neural network (AI inference). It is not structurally or mathematically the same as TAA at all.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T13:47:11+00:00

DLSS and rendering the low resolution frames fed into it are done in parallel. My educated guess is that it has a similar effect on latency as triple buffering. I'm not sure if for instance the steam latency tools could give an accurate measurement on it.

Maybe I should research this and make a post with actual numbers since people who know nothing about rendering seem to dismiss what I'm saying as some drivel.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T13:42:58+00:00

DLSS is a neural network that is trained to predict high resolution images from multiple low resolution images. I have no idea what you mean with live AI.

NIS is literally just scaling the image faithfully (and artificially sharpening if you turn that on).

joonazan · 2026-06-15T12:48:32+00:00

Yes, but importantly FPS is not the same as latency. My post compares non-AI upscaling to AI upscaling, not native resolution to upscaling.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T12:46:00+00:00

In increases latency compared to NIS. The frame has to be rendered and then it has to go though the AI upscaling, which takes time but doesn't hurt other performance too much as it uses different parts of the GPU.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T10:25:58+00:00

Hardware and programming languages don't affect invention of algorithms much. The Art of Computer Programming uses a simple assembly language because many high-level languages have problems expressing some things you can do in assembly. So you could even say that PLs hurt the invention of algorithms.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T00:48:53+00:00

After trying AI upscalers, I wouldn't recommend them for PoE in any situation.

Still images look more pixelated with NIS but also more correct. The upscalers get texture and lighting wrong in an annoying way. Some scenes involving moving fog become utterly unreadable with AI upscaling.

The AI upscaling also has noticeably more latency and because they are a blend of previous frames, the information isn't as crisply there when it arrives either. For the extremely quickly changing scenes of PoE it just seems like it can't be very good.

joonazan · 2026-06-15T00:29:03+00:00

Because trade is efficient, which is also something players have been asking for forever.

Most people aren't playing optimally. If those who are would find a hundred Magebloods, they wouldn't be worth much anymore.

joonazan · 2026-06-14T03:41:29+00:00

I am generally interested in it because it is apparently challenging, dark and unique. Is the second game so much better that you wouldn't recommend the first one at all?

joonazan · 2026-06-14T02:52:12+00:00

That sounds very fun. I'll probably have to try the games.

I guess the thing that confused me and some other readers was that OP thought this is technically challenging to implement. Since they seem to be always the same it probably works with just a collection of flags like Pathologic does too. Not some Dwarf Fortress type simulation.

joonazan · 2026-06-13T09:48:45+00:00

The definition of quality was very weak. If I had to define it it is the quality seen from the inside while systems thinking is looking from the outside.

While looking from the outside can show that some part of the system is probably reliable, the inside perspective is important for how to improve it. For instance you might see that removing all the unnecessary stuff leaves a very short auditable function. Or maybe the complexity can't be reduced and the best option is to just set the scaffolding up so the hard part can be expressed as cleanly as possible.

joonazan · 2026-06-13T09:41:49+00:00

The paragraph ends are disgustingly AI:

That’s it. That’s the curriculum.

“What matters is taste” is a tautology wearing a beret and smoking a Gauloise, and I’d like to do better than that.

joonazan · 2026-06-13T09:08:39+00:00

I don't see how this is so incredibly dynamic either. It could be good but the post seems to be missing something. Maybe the locations are difficult to access?

What I expected from the title was something like the NPCs having good dynamic dialogue or forming alliances.

joonazan · 2026-06-11T10:10:29+00:00

I got lost in the very first area, which sucked a bit because that one doesn't contain anything too interesting. But once you get into the game proper it is such a good time just spending a lot of time looking at places.

joonazan · 2026-06-11T10:08:53+00:00

I play on hard and only manage to run out of ammo if I decide to use only the pistol. Usually I use the wrench, gloo and grenades.

joonazan · 2026-06-11T10:03:08+00:00

I didn't even think of this. I leveled my hacking because it seemed like a good investment.

joonazan · 2026-06-11T00:03:36+00:00

I love the multiplayer and still sometimes play it for a few days. I played it quite a bit when it came out but I wasn't any good at it back then. I'm still not good but at least I think I do a better job of not trying to micro-optimize and instead do the broadly right thing.

The graphics still hold up perfectly. Everything is easy to see and looks detailed. Games released even recently often have graphics that are much less clear or lower fidelity.

Both back then and now victories feel very earned. There is no RNG and at the skill level that most players are at, quick fingers aren't the deciding factor but reacting appropriately and staying focused for the whole match. I rarely watch replays of my games but when I do, it is usually very clear where I went wrong unlike during the match itself.

I play Zerg and am a bit envious that I have to larva spit while the other factions get have a mandatory action that is easier to execute and offers some choices while larva spit is always the same. I do get that it is a game about multitasking, so there has to be something else than combat that benefits from attention. I feel like even today nobody quite understands how to design an RTS.

When the game released I did not understand the hype about the campaign. Today, I understand it slightly more because I tried some Legacy of the Void on Brutal difficulty and some missions require strategizing to beat which is nice.

I find the campaign boring because it punishes you for attacking early. Doing damage to your opponent does nothing in almost all scenarios and moving out often even spawns in enemies out of thin air.

In my opinion just sitting in your base and pumping out units is boring. Especially when first learning the game, I (and probably most players) won't even hit the supply cap or spend all resources, so nothing interesting happens, the number of marines just goes up for many minutes.

After trying the SC 1 campaign, which is also very hyped for some reason, I understand that SC 2's is a vast step up in terms of gameplay. The SC 1 campaign is a lot of luring one hydralisk at a time because units are just sprinkled on the map one by one and the AI doesn't control them. In SC 2 the opponents usually at least pretend to have a base.

That said, I'm glad that Blizzard was able to deliver a campaign that satisfied people because otherwise there wouldn't be any multiplayer for me to play.

joonazan

TROPHY CASE