1. Incorrect. The output of the decoder LLM is the probability distribution of the next token given the input text. Temperature=0 means that the output distribution is not pushed to be closer to a uniform distribution. The randomness comes from the sampling of the next token according to the output distribution to generate text. If you want determinism you always get the argmax of the distribution.
Incorrect. The output of the decoder LLM is logits that are then divided by the temperature and passed through softmax to give the probabilities. You can't actually set temperature to 0 (division by zero), but in the limit where temperature approaches 0, softmax converges to argmax.
Temperature = 1 is where it's not pushed in either direction.
I mean, I hate to break it to you all, but all y'all obsessing about FPS are the minority. By a lot.
While it has by no means killed the XBox or the Playstation line, I think they've obsessed over that segment of the market more than they should have to their own detriment, particularly due to the expense of keeping up with it. As a side effect it has also convinced that segment that they're bigger than they actually are. Most people don't care.
My kids don't care. My kids were lined up with allowances and/or birthday money in hand on day one. They're loving it.
I am too. It's not a skinner box designed to extract the rest of their money from them. It's a complete, quality product. No subscription pass. No seasons. No loot boxes for money. No gambling mechanics designed to secretly back to real world money. They made a good choice.
I'm sympathetic. I care at least some; not obsessed but I do understand what you're getting at. And even that position + total obsessing is clearly in the minority.
Nintendo knows what they're targeting, they hit it, and while you're complaining about the fps not being very good they're rolling in dough. I mean, if I had to choose between satisfying the fps obsessives and making more money than I even know what to do with, I know which I'd choose.
I'm finding that as I play this game, the frame drops from 30 to ~15 really do suck. It's not just the abilities that do it - it'll happen in the overworld and when walking around villages. In most parts of the game just spinning the camera is enough to tank it and it just feels bad. Though maybe performance varies between earlier and newer switch models.
Dropping from an average of 60 to 30 doesn't feel anywhere near as bad as that, which is one of the key benefits of a higher framerate. If you check out TOTK with a 60fps mod on an emulator, it really is a much, much nicer experience (emulator caveats notwithstanding).
Nintendo often does focus on framerate in several of their other major games. And they have done so as a selling feature for rereleases of past games (including Zelda titles) that were previously locked at 30. In this case I think they just really can't accomplish their design goals with TOTK on the Switch hardware without sacrificing the frame rate. But I bet it would be a major feature of any "next gen" patch for the game if they were to release, say, a Switch 2 any time soon.
FPS is a fair criticism of these games. They are fundamentally enjoyable games, so you look past the flaws. But low FPS in sections is still a flaw.
If you let your kids play a version that had a smooth 60+fps throughout, then play a version with 15fps stutters, then asked which one they enjoyed more, they'd prefer the higher FPS one. Stutters are immersion breaking, but it's not going to make you put down the game until it drops to the single digits.
I'm not stranger to loving flawed games, so I get it. I played this shit out of Pirana Bytes games, and managed to finish an early build of Cyberpunk. I've loved many flawed games; but I just wish they didn't have those flaws.
Who says I'm obsessing about it? The comment made an exaggerated statement about the visual aspect of a video game on a community known for being sticklers for detail and spec because they're technical as a demographic, their jobs are also technical. You cannot bullshit this demographic and ass-pull subjective hot takes on something measurable.
Address the point at hand, don't go off on some tirade about how much someone else loves it, that doesn't negate the fact that it runs very poorly on existing, released official hardware.
Who says I'm complaining? You are projecting so much of your emotions onto what I had to say and completely ignoring what I'm responding to.
It's a fact. A fact is not a complaint, it's an observation and measurable spec. Are scientists just obsessing?
There are no gacha mechanics in this game. There is a mechanic where you throw some dropped monster parts into a device in order to receive random building materials, but monster parts and device parts are already abundant, drop rates are basically equal for all parts, and, most crucially, there's no way to spend real money on any of this. It's not there to facilitate gambling, it's there to incentivize creativity in your builds by giving you parts that you might not otherwise go out of your way to acquire or use.
> So you're just going to ignore the gacha mechanics?
No money involved. It's as much gambling as going to random.org and guess a random invocation. It's as much gambling as random encuonters on JRPGs, or quest/mission rewards, or really anything else in gaming with random chance. Is catching a pokemon in any pokemon game a gacha mechanic? You use a pokeball and might or might not get the pokemon. What about any game ability with a miss chance or a critical hit chance? D&D is peak gacha.
Really, it's just "drop some common stuff and get some random util back"
Gaming nowadays is full of "games" that are actually just live services trying to extract as much money as possible from you. This mechanic is completely unrelated. Your comment seems an over reaction from someone that never actually tried the game, or doesn't know how bad current big budget or mobile games are.
TotK's in-game mechanic literally operates like a gachapon machine. You insert something (a facsimile of a coin), out comes a capsule with something random in it. Softening kids to the mechanics of gacha isn't good. Furthermore, you completely dismissed the rest of my comment and what I was responding to.
Pokemon Masters is definitely a gacha game, so maybe there's a progression there in terms of where this is heading.
In the spirit of gambling, I bet you fifty bucks that the Nintendo theme park has gachapon machines with capsule toys in.
Nice way of completely invalidating all your arguments in this thread. I hope this will be a lesson for you next time you go on a toxic and obnoxious rampage.
Anyway, time to go back to the most beautiful game I've ever played. A game that looks fantastic.
You sound like a 90's mom complaing about GTA's violence.
Gaming world full of actual gambling and even worse practices, and what what should we complain here about? A single payer game that can be offline only and never asks for a credit card has very minor random feature that looks like a gacha machine...
> Pokemon Masters
Mobile game. But please ignore every random mechanic in every game since gaming dawn that are no different.
> In the spirit of gambling, I bet you fifty bucks that the Nintendo theme park has gachapon machines with capsule toys in.
Missing the point. And I'm sure they do.
> Furthermore, you completely dismissed the rest of my comment and what I was responding to.
Pot calling the kettle black? your gacha comment and link did not even address the paraghrah which i quote:
> I am too. It's not a skinner box designed to extract the rest of their money from them. It's a complete, quality product. No subscription pass. No seasons. No loot boxes for money. No gambling mechanics designed to secretly back to real world money. They made a good choice.
but let's go back to your tech stuff.
I will state: I agree that game looks good.
It has frame drops ocasinally in docked mode or just by using ultra hand.
It is capped at 30fps
But it looks good.
No i am not one of those that think 30fps are enough for gaming, I have gaming PC , i have owned a low latency monitor for decades.
But this is a fucking switch, and this is a puzzle and exploration game. With the crazy phisics and amount of things (plus particles) that this game interacts with, the fact that it can run on 30fps is amazing by itself. Making this kind of game on this platform run better for sure it's very hard work, obviously it can always be better, just look at any demo scene stuff, but this is still a masterpiece, and there is no other game on the console which shares such good looks.
Would i prefer if it ran at 60fps? obviously. Would I want it to be uglier or have less features for that? No. The resources required to jump from 30 to 60 are big, i don't think it could have the same ambience on all those environments and all things happening around on a switch and keep a consistent 60fps.
I'm not asking for 60fps. I'm asking to not go down into single digit fps when using ultrahand or being in crowded areas. A stable 30fps isn't an unreasonable ask in 2023. To claim it's running at 30fps is to not understand the problem.
It's capped at 30fps. That isn't the problem. The problem is that the framerate is wildly erratic, and it can hit single digits, and fall down into the teens not uncommonly.
It's OK to criticize something, and it's OK to not pretend that something is perfect. It's a $70 product. Criticism is healthy. As is not going with the groupthink and denying measurable objective fact.
Game might look good. Game performs poorly, but so do most AAA games these days, so there's that. Jedi Survivor or The Last of Us on PC, anyone?
The way the capsule machines actually work in-game is that the probabilities of getting each potential item are roughly equal, and you get around 10 "pulls" for an extremely common currency, where each capsule is from a predetermined pool per machine of around 4 items.
Which makes pulling nonrandom given the law of averages. It's effectively a joke.
The Minish cap had a gacha machine, it was cute. The important part is you can't use real money on it, which means it HAS to be designed as an actual in game reward.
Nintendo's actual microtransaction garbage is the amiibos, which are shameless and often explicitly pay to win.
Minish Cap was 2004 before we had a better understanding of what is and is not a good thing to expose people to.
Pokemon Masters is literally a gacha game. The Nintendo theme park will probably have gachapon machines in it now kids are softening to the mechanism of it.
Which is what you were asserting. Gambling with fake money is a lot more fun to non-addicts than real gambling, especially because the system is usually rigged in your favor so you enjoy it instead of optimizing for tickling a broken reward system in your brain so you give a billion dollar corporation every dollar you have.
As others have stated, those machines are designed to give you the stuff, not to take your resources. That's not gacha.
> So you're just going to ignore the gacha mechanics?
I am certain that the parent poster was referring to the toxic microtransaction "loot box" style of in-game "gambling" that involves real world currency.
Unless I am extremely mistaken, that is not what's going on in TOTK.
Even those mechanics barely qualify as gambling imo.
When you find one of the dispensers, if you throw 5 charges in you'll get several of everything in the dispenser. The charges are easy enough to get that the only time I've _not_ thrown in 5 is in the tutorial where they tell you how to use it.
I hate it when people just cut off quotes and then proceed to argue based on that, so I will not be engaging with you any further as you are arguing in bad faith. The words after "gambling mechanics" are not incidental flourishes that could just be cut off.
And yet that's exactly what you did to me; ignored the majority of my comment to hone in on one little thing and go off at a complete tangent to what the rest of the discussion is about.
Have a good day and enjoy the average performing modern AAA title.
I don't think it is fair to hand wave away the performance issues like this. Frame rate drops down to 20 and below are very noticeable to the untrained eye. We're not talking about the difference between 30/60/120fps where you don't really know what you're missing until you get used to the higher frame rates.
The "Digital Foundry" tech analysis found that it's mostly stable 30fps, with occasional dips in villages but nothing that meaningfully impacts gameplay. My experience matches with that, so I'm inclined to believe their analysis. It isn't perfect, but I think a lot of comments in this thread are overstating the issue.
FPS drops throw people off. Just like TV that drops signal, car that sometimes doesn't accelerate, or maybe a website that sometimes loads 10s. It's perfectly fine to care about it.
>I mean, I hate to break it to you all, but all y'all obsessing about FPS are the minority. By a lot.
Sure but once you play a game on high refresh rate (+120hz) it's soooo smooth that after it everything below that looks like a PowerPoint presentation. Even doing coding or just browsing the web on a 60hz display looks terrible. And playing a game on 30fps with occassional drops to 20... just terrible no matter what.
(And yes it's not just shooters and competitive games there are countless good single player games with high frame rate gameplay)
Yes, and every subsequent generation. I still play, I've even IPS-modded the display on my DMG-01 to appreciate what the console could actually draw in terms of frames.
Same, although my collection is a GBC/GBA and PSP all clear shelled and with IPS screens. Gadgets don't have clear shells anymore :( hopefully it'll come back, was kinda cyberpunky
And the Switch has a 60hz display too and people can connect it to whatever display they have. It's just Nintendo hellbent on the 30fps. Even though there are games with perfect 60fps gameplay on the Switch from Nintendo too not just 3rd parties.
Maybe this is just comic exaggeration that's flying over my head, but I find it very strange to interpret Nintendo's intentions this way.
TOTK is clearly very very ambitious in terms of physics simulation and interactivity -- it very clearly feels like a case of "we are stretching the limits of this hardware and we just can't pull it off at 60fps" and not "lol who needs 60fps."
Are there 60fps games on Switch that are actually doing this level of ambitious interactivity?
That said, it definitely feels like there's some room for optimization e.g. the Ultrahand effect. I wonder if Nintendo will address this in a patch. This game was clearly a large and ambitious project that surely had an internal deadline to meet. As engineers we know how that goes... you have to balance completeness, correctness, performance, and actually hitting your deadlines.
Well, you can't run TotK at 60fps on the existing Switch hardware, even if it was unlocked, it's just not got enough grunt. The only alternative is make a less-demanding game, optimize it better, or release better hardware than can support the ideas adequately.
Yeah, there have been so many times during gameplay I've said "man, this crazy scenario I somehow concocted by tossing a lazer cannon glued to a fan into the middle of a group of bad guys sure is fun—but if it were just running at 10fps more I could really enjoy it."
The game looks and plays great. Most people won't notice framerate. You don't have to either.
Dude, someone said it looks fantastic, a purely subjective observation. And then you disagreed. It seems disingenuous for you to start disputing someone's logic.
Subjectivity versus objectivity. We can measure framerate and resolution, and for a 2023 title, it's really not ticking the boxes on what "fantastic" visuals are in modern gaming from AAA. The hardware struggles to run the game, let's be real.
In typical Nintendo Zelda fashion, it will probably get released on next-gen hardware in the future and run a lot better.
It's OK to say it is below expectations for the price point, publisher, developer, and competing product. It's just a performance spec.
Millions of games on the playstation and n64 were sold despite running at 12 fps, having horrific graphical artifacts (stupid texture mapping on the playstation, god awful smeary "filtering" on the n64), and everybody has fond memories of it, to the point that it's currently popular to emulate those artifacts.
If you make an actually good game, people will cross broken glass to play it.
To whom is that fine? To the people going from $2/hour to zero it certainly isn't.
I honestly cannot grasp how some people can _forcibly_ remove other people's _options_ then pat themselves on the back as some sort of armchair savior.
Yes, for some people a bad option could still be their best option. What sort of moral superpower is that that enables you to forbid a contract between two consenting adults A and B such that A wants to work for X and B that's willing to pay X, but you as a C that just won't let it happen and is willing to use force to stop it from happening
Ideally minimum wage should be coupled with higher taxes on the wealthy, a generous social safety net, a job guarantee fronted by the state, and a sovereign wealth fund which pays out a minimum basic income. This would eliminate shitty jobs no one wants to do and get rid of business models which depend on them, which is a net win for everyone.
No, as you can see by my posts, I'm a strong supporter of min wage, but there is no need for 'job guaranteed by the state' or 'UBI' - in fact, doing so would lead to economic collapse.
All of the UBI supporters need to do the math on it, it's 'extremely expensive'.
The 'economic collapse' part happens when 'not working' becomes normative, and socially acceptable - and be assured that it will.
The idea of 'working for a living' when you can just 'do whatever you want' is a bit glib. I suggest the only reason people would work, is to pay for that 'special thing' they want aka 'trip' or 'iphone'.
The ideological problem with UBI is the same as any broad social welfare program and that it doesn't reward material output. That is 'extremely bad'.
Finally - I do suggest that it may be possible to 'very simplistically means tested welfare' for people (to get rid of overhead) - and - to allow some of those people to have jobs so they don't get caught in that trap.
In fact, I suggest for people 65+ we'll need a program like this because they can still work, and frankly, working may be very good for their health, and they can do things that are 'extremely needed' right now, such as help to take care of the very elderly.
No one ever said anything about infinite money. The basic idea of socialism is that democracy should control some of the allocation of labor and that, because the functions of the nation state are necessary to the health of enterprises and because the fundamental purpose of society is the common good, the state has a right to some of the profits, which go beyond merely taking money from the wealthy.
Plenty of nation-states make different trade offs between productivity or growth or whatever and mitigating poverty. To act as if the particular style we have in America is the only possible thing that works is asinine.
When it comes to employees making a contract with an employer in the field of minimum wage jobs, the employees have no bargaining power. There will always be someone willing to work for less.
Ideologically, yes, your argument is sound. But I'm begging you to think through what would actually happen with no minimum wage. In reality, it would absolutely destroy the standard of living for unskilled work as there's a race to the bottom on wages.
Businesses only hire enough employees to satisfy the demand for products and services. Eliminating minimum wage won't create nearly as many jobs as you think, and instead, would merely result minimum wage earners losing their homes while they are forced to agree to work for $2 instead of losing the job entirely to someone who will.
This is a very interesting discussion, one way to think about the issue is: "what should be the minimum wage" and "who defines it".
If you set a minimum wage too high, you are taking jobs from lot of people, and if its too low you risk people getting paid less.
Whatever number you come up with is going to be arbitrary. A country wide minimum wage is stupid because the cost of living in New York is very different from Lousiana, a state wide makes more sense, but even so, it varies greatly from city to city within the same sate, so a city wide makes even more sense, if you keep adding granularity you'll reach the individual level, because the cost of living within cities changes fast, and there's a plethora of other factors to consider.
I have worked for really low wages in the past, even the lowest of unskilled worker still provides a value. Senior programmers on NYC are worth at least $60/h, now, how much a really low skilled worker is worth? At the time I was an unskilled worker it was was around $10, and thats how much I got paid despite the minimum wage being $8, anyone could get a job for $10, so thats the value a worker with essentially no skills was able to provide.
The $8 minimum wage didn't make a difference on wages, because unskilled workers were already providing more value than the minimum wage, so policy makers were behind in raising it, which they did.
Raising the minimum wage and matching it to the market price at $10 wouldn't make any difference either, however, raising it to $15 would wreak havoc, you are basically saying that any worker whose job isn't worth at least 15$ should not be working.
A Minimum wage value written on a piece of paper can't magically increase the true value of a worker, wages won't drop to $1 if you set it as $1, and also won't raise to $50 if you set it to $50.
Your argument falls apart when you consider that the people who would be working those jobs overwhelmingly approve of the minimum wage. It's a coordination problem caused by the power imbalance between labor producers and consumers. Without the minimum wage, there would be a race to the bottom, but labor producers wouldn't end up better off. The minimum wage is effectively a national labor union.
I agree with your answer, but not that your question is the question. Some that I think are closer:
Does an artist own their name? Yes. I can’t publish a work of art and say “authored by savant_penguin”.
Can I sell art with product name “in the style of savant_penguin”? I think this varies by jurisdiction; it’s not going to be legal in the EU I think. It might well be in the US.
If the disruption of supply chains is the actual culprit for inflation, shouldn't we observe gradual deflation as they recover?
If on the other hand it's printing money (as I'd expect from the trillions of free money in recent months) it should only get worse. What I observe is more consistent with money printing than disruption of supply chains
in some ways you already are - the price of gasoline and even diesel have eased significantly over the last few months, for example. Long term, that will pull prices of energy-intensive products (shipping, etc).
However, "prices are sticky", they go up quickly and go down slowly. Companies aren't going to race to bring their margins back down, if people are paying X then they'll keep prices at X. Especially if they are worried that prices might continue increasing in the future - this is the "inertial" part of inertial inflation, it isn't just about inflation itself but about managing expectations in the economy around future inflation. So far there supposedly hasn't been a big inertial component but who knows.
Really what we needed to discourage it was a massive windfall profits tax - the Fed is also basically saying that we need actual fiscal policy here and that they don't really have the tools to manage this like they want - but this gets back to "there are 48 definite no votes for any bill, and we're dependent on what we can get those last 2 senators to agree to". The fed is using the only levers it has, and that lever is "a gut-shot to aggregate demand for the next decade", that is not the right policy tool but it's the only one that congress can't block.
This is why you don't throw gasoline on the fire during 2018-2019 when the economy is already going gangbusters, because when the economy inevitably dipped, suddenly those policy tools like government spending become much more "expensive" to implement when there's already tons of money sloshing around the economy.
>If the disruption of supply chains is the actual culprit for inflation, shouldn't we observe gradual deflation as they recover?
Both China (most importantly) and Russia (to a lesser extent) have not recovered. China seems to be getting worse with a historic once-in-a-century heatwave and drought that is currently destroying productivity.
At a very simple level, it’s akin to not yelling bomb in a theatre since it would be faster and more efficient for everyone to evacuate in an orderly manner without being informed of the bomb. I feel like our society does require some gatekeepers and can’t be run well if it’s just vocal collectives yelling at each other.
>I feel like our society does require some gatekeepers and can’t be run well if it’s just vocal collectives yelling at each other.
I'm glad you recognize in yourself that you can't be trusted with certain information and you need, personally, a big brother to lie to you. You do you. I'd appreciate if you didn't make the same assessment about me, and others.
Reading back, I'm actually genuinely interested to know why you want a third-party 'gatekeeper' to protect you personally from certain kinds of (uncomfortable) scientific facts. I don't judge, you can make that decisions for yourself, but why do you personally want to write that blank-check to a third-party, so that they decide what scientific facts you should or shouldn't be allowed to learn? Maybe you can elaborate?
Because I’ve come to the realization that there maybe some people that have the time, drive and intelligence to look at all the facts and come to the “right” decision but in the overwhelming number of cases people don’t want to do this exercise and will rely on frameworks provided. If one isn’t provided they’ll come up with their own and there’s no guarantees any of it will work out for the good of society.
This coupled with the fact that there is currently a firehose of “information” that I doubt even people with the best of abilities and intentions can adequately grok if they’re not specifically paid for the time to think about them.
The next step then is the government deciding what will harm us, so we can be protected. And then you got a very nice little fascist country that runs perfectly, and the trains run on time to move all those harmful people away from where good people live. Out of sight, out of mind.
And as time progresses, new laws are no longer common sense ("don't steal, don't murder"), but become increasingly cumbersome, while still acceptable ("don't drive a vehicle unless we license you for vehicle use") and ultimately problematic ("You can't own sulphuric acid"). Before too long, laws become criminal, and those must not be obeyed ("You have to believe this or that, or at least shut up about what you really think, because doing otherwise may hurt people").
Too many laws make everyone a criminal, for eventually, everyday, innocent behaviour becomes criminalised.
When you arrive at thoughtcrime, it already is too late.
