Im pretty sure we could make AI in games smarter and/or better than humans for a long time. They are just not fun to play against. You need to have AI that you can win against. What i think should be happening instead of neural networks is the ai should gamble a bit more . The good example is eu4 where on hard difficulty ai will not attack you until its sure it can win… which makes it more predictable than normal ai beacuse you can reasonably guess whetewer it will attack you and try to outmanouver it. Wheras on normal sometimes it will just attack you if there is a reasonable ( or sometimes even unreasonable ) chance to win which makes normal sometimes( very very very very rarely ) harder difficulty. Now hard difficulty is stil generaly ( 99,9% of time ) much harder due to ai cheats but what i said is a thing. Total war Warhammer 3 could use that in particular to spice things up. Currently attacking army will always attack and defending will defend which makes attacking more advantagous , and the army will always wait for reinforcment . They could for example make it so depending on the army composition ( or even just rng ) the defending army will sometimes attack ( for example when there are only melee combatants ) so that you dont have time to deal damage with mage . Or the opposite. Make it so the attacking army will just stay still and protect the artilery and bombard you with canons it it has lots of artilery . Like you know just some basic strategies so the fights arent always so similar at the begining.

Is there a way to sort steamcharts by total hours played? Im kinda curious about that stat but i can seem to find a way to sort it on site.

That kinda explains the dissciation gamers and game makers (studio,publisher etc ) have with each other today. And the publishers continuus trying at live service games. I imagine similar thing is happening with consoles. I personaly knew it was a thing with FIFA but i never knew it was so widespread ( fifa and sports game are kinda special or at least i thought they were ). Maybe those pepole bought one game a year additionaly sometimes if it was aired often enough as ad on tv.

That actually explains so much shit we see today , like online subcsriptions on PlayStation and xbox. If the majority ( or large enough minority ) will play one game only making them pay for online is a goddam goldmine. F* i would probably do it if was ceo of PlayStation and actually knew the stats ( and Obviusly if they were favorable ).

Only in us tho. I think eu has it set to percantage only.

By console controlers i meant first party console controlers. So dualshock,dualsense, official xbox controlers or switch pro controler ( Most commonly xbox , alghtough recently i saw uptick in recomending PlayStation controlers ). The 3rd party controlers are either poor quality or just as expensive and quite often both ( which is probably why console official controlers are recommended as sort of stamp of quality )

I mean its good enough just as a quick setting menu like in kilzone. I wonder why more games dont use it as such. I would love to have it as quick setting in cyberpunk so i can quickly change between grenade rocket launcher and the camuflage ( or to be precise map whatewer i need there , thats just my particular build ).

Yup i see that complaint very often and i do not understand where pepole get it. The r2 l2 whatewer its called thingy is probably the most used new controler feature since analog became a thing ( or perhaps speaker on the controler. Thats used quite extensivly since dualshock 4 ).

The touchpad is still usless tho despite it being a thing since ps4.

They are not good at least partialy beacuse of sony which apparently actively sabotaged them. At least dualshock 4 . It may be better with dualsense alghtough i doubt it .

Also another cavieat is that they unfortunetly are quite affordable for what they offer. Even on pc the recommendation is usualy to buy console controler ( alghtough not nessearily current gen one ). They truly pack quite a bit of technology in them.