Recommended Posts

I find it likely that when you repeatedly do the same thing that has failed numbers of times in the past, success is far from assured. But good luck to MS with that.

There is a tug-of-war between two polar opposites - those that wish to advance, and the complacent.

 

The complacent are of the opinion that Windows reached its zenith with 7 - and should not advance further.  (Problem - where do you go if you can't go forward?)

 

What honestly scares me about that is there are all too many cases of a stalled or complacent OS first losing developers, then losing the user base, and finally outright dying.

 

Apparently, the complacent largely don't care.  (That is, in fact, why I wonder what their real motive is - I doubt they are stupid; still, I doubt they are being all that honest, either.)

Daring to advance is not exactly safe, but it's a lot safer in a business sense than standing still.

It's a part of this discussion and directly related to the fud you were going to spread. Either discuss or don't bother replying... Oh wait you can't discuss it further because you'll just dig yourself in to a deeper hole.

The truth hurts, no wonder you dug up my reply from how many pages back just to rehash something that is so true. Deal with it mate, just because you don't agree, doesn't mean you are entitled to make sarcastic replies and using the word "FUD" to take me on.

There is a tug-of-war between two polar opposites - those that wish to advance, and the complacent.

I would submit that both camps want to advance equally. The problem is they disagree on what the term "advance" actually means.

The truth hurts, no wonder you dug up my reply from how many pages back just to rehash something that is so true. Deal with it mate, just because you don't agree, doesn't mean you are entitled to make sarcastic replies and using the word "FUD" to take me on.

Or, bear with me on this, I was reading through the thread and saw your post and replied, pretty sure that's how these community forum things work ;)

The long and short of it all is all OS's have inconsistencies, learn to live with it. And stop getting upset over such minor things.

Or, bear with me on this, I was reading through the thread and saw your post and replied, pretty sure that's how these community forum things work ;)

The long and short of it all is all OS's have inconsistencies, learn to live with it. And stop getting upset over such minor things.

So if you are reading through the thread as you so rightfully claim to , why don't I even see you try to take on PGhammer, Dotmatrix or them folk like how you do with me? See what I'm getting at? I don't need to reply to you, because honestly..... there is no point.

I find it likely that when you repeatedly do the same thing that has failed numbers of times in the past, success is far from assured. But good luck to MS with that.

They're on the right track with unifying everything. A responsive, universal OS is better than multiple OSs, that have little in common.

Dot Matrix, on 15 Feb 2015 - 17:08, said:

They're on the right track with unifying everything. A responsive, universal OS is better than multiple OSs, that have little in common.

 

Multiple OSes that fit the form factor they're made for are better than a universal, "lowest common denominator" OS... in my opinion of course...

So if you are reading through the thread as you so rightfully claim to , why don't I even see you try to take on PGhammer, Dotmatrix or them folk like how you do with me? See what I'm getting at? I don't need to reply to you, because honestly..... there is no point.

Again, stop taking it so personally. What you said was inaccurate, i pulled you up on that fact, you get upset. That's not a mature response, the mature response would be to discuss these inconsistencies. Clearly you're not going to do that so there's little point you continuing to reply to me.

As for why i didn;t reply to Dot or PG etc, it's really none of your business who i choose to reply to or why, however i shall let you know in this case, it was mainly because i recently had a very similar discussion with another person, therefore it was of interest to me, not any more.

It seems like the biggest point of debate in Windows 10 is the UI. I loved the new of Vista and then really loved Windows 7 when it came out. They had a beautiful UI that was pleasant to look at and fun to use. While a step backwards, Winows 8's UI was still alright. Now they have this blocky, God-awful looking start menu and hiring, flat, single color Winow graphics. People seem to be suffering from some mass hysteria that dictates this boring flat look is cool and more productive.mi even went as war as to post a picture of Windiws 3.1 as a joke and people respond that it looks great. Whoever is in charge of designing the he GUI at MS must be good because they have the majority of users brainwashed. They clearly have no idea how to build a UI though. They took the modern looking icons of Vista/7 and turned them into ugly pixelated Windows 3.1 style icons. As for window graphics, they got rid of the nice looking elements with a 3D look, gradients, and glowing and turned them into dumbed down 1 color flat simple images. Someone explain to me how making the UI boring and ugly makes it more productive.

  • Like 2

Multiple OSes that fit the form factor they're made for are better than a universal, "lowest common denominator" OS... in my opinion of course...

Why is Windows 10 an LCD? It's still a full featured OS. Responsive design doesn't take anything away from that.

Multiple OSes that fit the form factor they're made for are better than a universal, "lowest common denominator" OS... in my opinion of course...

"Fit the formfactor" - sounds like a niche OS to me.  Like WindowsRT as OS - which failed due to being way late.  Android has capabilities beyond its formfactor - this is proven every day.  iOS?  It has multiple form-factors - the only thing keeping it from taking on OS X directly are the legions of OS X fanatics that would have a collective herd of cattle should that happen.  (Apple itself could care less.)  How it appears to me (and please - let me know if I'm wrong about it - and why) they basically want Windows to remain as it was with 7 - support only for keyboards and mice.

It seems like the biggest point of debate in Windows 10 is the UI. I loved the new of Vista and then really loved Windows 7 when it came out. They had a beautiful UI that was pleasant to look at and fun to use. While a step backwards, Winows 8's UI was still alright. Now they have this blocky, God-awful looking start menu and hiring, flat, single color Winow graphics. People seem to be suffering from some mass hysteria that dictates this boring flat look is cool and more productive.mi even went as war as to post a picture of Windiws 3.1 as a joke and people respond that it looks great. Whoever is in charge of designing the he GUI at MS must be good because they have the majority of users brainwashed. They clearly have no idea how to build a UI though. They took the modern looking icons of Vista/7 and turned them into ugly pixelated Windows 3.1 style icons. As for window graphics, they got rid of the nice looking elements with a 3D look, gradients, and glowing and turned them into dumbed down 1 color flat simple images. Someone explain to me how making the UI boring and ugly makes it more productive.

Explain to me how the icons are pixelated? Flat, minimalist design is the "in' thing right now. Everything from personalized business cards, to interior decorating is using these design concepts. Microsoft and Google adapting these concepts for their operating systems are merely an extension of that. Simplistic design is helping make technology more accessible to people that would otherwise find it too complex. It's also helping create professional looking, but relaxed business applications, as evidenced by the Surface Hub, Modern Office templates, etc that are easy to understand and use.

 

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/stories/design/

Dot Matrix, on 15 Feb 2015 - 17:50, said:Dot Matrix, on 15 Feb 2015 - 17:50, said:

Why is Windows 10 an LCD? It's still a full featured OS. Responsive design doesn't take anything away from that.

 

We'll see. Windows 8 the day it came out was definitely an "LCD". I hope W10 will be great on desktops but the new calculator is not a good indication. And please don't compare living rooms with computer UI, it's not a great comparison

We'll see. Windows 8 the day it came out was definitely an "LCD". I hope W10 will be great on desktops but the new calculator is not a good indication. And please don't compare living rooms with computer UI, it's not a great comparison

What's wrong with the new Calculator? And yes, I am comparing the computer UI to living rooms (and more), because that is where the designers are pulling their designs from. Metro was initially conceived based on the numerous typography, and iconography we see in the world around us.

Again, stop taking it so personally. What you said was inaccurate, i pulled you up on that fact, you get upset. That's not a mature response, the mature response would be to discuss these inconsistencies. Clearly you're not going to do that so there's little point you continuing to reply to me.

As for why i didn;t reply to Dot or PG etc, it's really none of your business who i choose to reply to or why, however i shall let you know in this case, it was mainly because i recently had a very similar discussion with another person, therefore it was of interest to me, not any more.

:laugh: Ok cool Mikechipshop. Still don't know why you'd think you are making me upset. I get upset at real world problems, not at someone on Neowin in a desktop thread who thinks he has a point.

It seems like the biggest point of debate in Windows 10 is the UI. I loved the new of Vista and then really loved Windows 7 when it came out. They had a beautiful UI that was pleasant to look at and fun to use. While a step backwards, Winows 8's UI was still alright. Now they have this blocky, God-awful looking start menu and hiring, flat, single color Winow graphics. People seem to be suffering from some mass hysteria that dictates this boring flat look is cool and more productive.mi even went as war as to post a picture of Windiws 3.1 as a joke and people respond that it looks great. Whoever is in charge of designing the he GUI at MS must be good because they have the majority of users brainwashed. They clearly have no idea how to build a UI though. They took the modern looking icons of Vista/7 and turned them into ugly pixelated Windows 3.1 style icons. As for window graphics, they got rid of the nice looking elements with a 3D look, gradients, and glowing and turned them into dumbed down 1 color flat simple images. Someone explain to me how making the UI boring and ugly makes it more productive.

LOL i stopped reading at "I love the new of vista" "They had a beautiful UI".

 

God, I hated the rounded corners of windows in both vista\7. Than again im more into simple design and not into blingy,gaudy looking design.

 

Win 10 is not even done with the UI, taskbar transparency and menu transparency is coming in the next couple builds.

There is a tug-of-war between two polar opposites - those that wish to advance, and the complacent.

The complacent are of the opinion that Windows reached its zenith with 7 - and should not advance further. (Problem - where do you go if you can't go forward?)

What honestly scares me about that is there are all too many cases of a stalled or complacent OS first losing developers, then losing the user base, and finally outright dying.

Apparently, the complacent largely don't care. (That is, in fact, why I wonder what their real motive is - I doubt they are stupid; still, I doubt they are being all that honest, either.)

Daring to advance is not exactly safe, but it's a lot safer in a business sense than standing still.

A decade ago I walked into the break room and a zdnet magazine maybe pcmag.com had a cover with longhorn. I saw aero and thought cool. Then sat down and a strange thought I never would think entered my head. Windows XP does everything anyone can ever want.

XP has security, groups, real multitasking, acl, NT kernel etc.

Longhorn was just eye candy and bloat which would use more resources for the same tasks now since winfs was gone.

I became sad and shocked. A geek shouldnt be like thi??

I was right. 2 years later in 2007 I got a laptop with Vista. OMG UGH. XP couldn't have been put on so fast. Thought hard disk would spin out of control.It had 2 gigs of ram too and still??!

Win 7 has instant search and better security.

But stay behind you say? XP works and so does 7. Why upgrade? They are like cars now. No difference between them 10 years old or current. They run the same and only replace them when they die.

Does Joe Six pack really need 50,000 mips i5 to run word and do his taxes? No. Therefore he will keep old hardware with whatever OS came with it.

Sorry little reason to leave 7.

XP has security

 

Stop.... Stop! The laughing, it HURTS!

 

9czRygkcE.gif

 

 

Does Joe Six pack really need 50,000 mips i5 to run word and do his taxes? No. Therefore he will keep old hardware with whatever OS came with it.

 

Joe "six pack" does a lot more with tech than Word or taxes. In fact, these can be done on a tab - Better news for Windows 10!

A decade ago I walked into the break room and a zdnet magazine maybe pcmag.com had a cover with longhorn. I saw aero and thought cool. Then sat down and a strange thought I never would think entered my head. Windows XP does everything anyone can ever want.

XP has security, groups, real multitasking, acl, NT kernel etc.

Longhorn was just eye candy and bloat which would use more resources for the same tasks now since winfs was gone.

I became sad and shocked. A geek shouldnt be like thi??

I was right. 2 years later in 2007 I got a laptop with Vista. OMG UGH. XP couldn't have been put on so fast. Thought hard disk would spin out of control.It had 2 gigs of ram too and still??!

Win 7 has instant search and better security.

But stay behind you say? XP works and so does 7. Why upgrade? They are like cars now. No difference between them 10 years old or current. They run the same and only replace them when they die.

Does Joe Six pack really need 50,000 mips i5 to run word and do his taxes? No. Therefore he will keep old hardware with whatever OS came with it.

Sorry little reason to leave 7.

 

You were right. A geek shouldn't be like that. A technology enthusiast shouldn't have looked at Longhorn/Vista and only seen the shine. It laid the groundwork for major changes in how the OS worked behind the scenes. An enthusiast would've seen that.

 

An educated enthusiast would also have figured out a decade ago that WinFS was a unicorn. It was just some magical concept people never really understood but wholeheartedly believed was The Future

Joshie, on 15 Feb 2015 - 15:50, said:

You were right. A geek shouldn't be like that. A technology enthusiast shouldn't have looked at Longhorn/Vista and only seen the shine. It laid the groundwork for major changes in how the OS worked behind the scenes. An enthusiast would've seen that.

 

An educated enthusiast would also have figured out a decade ago that WinFS was a unicorn. It was just some magical concept people never really understood but wholeheartedly believed was The Future

 

But 8 is just a cell phone on a desktop. 

 

 

I develop on Windows 8.1.  I tried on my cell phone, but it didn't work.  I think you are lying, sir.

... and in the end XP was still the better OS which just worked and wasn't buggy and didn't run like crap back in

Are you kidding? XP had next to no stability. It ran worse than a drunk and tired driver. Even now on the network I support, XP has a pretty cruddy track record of being the worst to troubleshoot. Most times, the PC just gets reimaged rather than have someone troubleshoot the OS.

Are you kidding? XP had next to no stability. It ran worse than a drunk and tired driver.

 

The kid part of "kidding" sounds about right. I'm getting the impression this is someone who simply wasn't around or aware yet of XP during its first 2-3 years on the market. Aside from being a significant jump in hardware requirements over the Windows 2000 it was built from, and aside from being panned as a "Fisher Price" OS, aside from the vitriolic hatred spewed by users introduced to product activation for the first time in Windows, aside from people declaring there was no reason to upgrade because Windows 2000 was the better choice and worked just fine (sound familiar?), aside from gamers sticking to Windows 9x for its superior DOS compatibility well into the 200x's, aside from all of that, well... No, that's pretty much all that needs to be said. The Cult of XP Nostalgia has been soundly and thoroughly mocked into irrelevance over the years, and the only confusing thing happening here is that for someone to be too young to remember the early days of XP, it makes no sense for them to have an old geezer attitude about technology only needing to be good-enough-for-grandma.

 

Some people out there simply have no idea what the markets are out there. They can't see beyond their own bubble of needs and wants. When a technology company starts doing something that they can't relate to, it makes them angry, and they declare it stupid and pointless and, speaking for all these imaginary people just-like-them, insist "nobody wants this". These are like the political nutcases who believe their opinions match those of the silent majority they speak for.

 

If nothing else, this guy is ready to age into dementia at his future talk radio show on an AM frequency in fly-over country.

Joshie, on 15 Feb 2015 - 18:28, said:

The kid part of "kidding" sounds about right. I'm getting the impression this is someone who simply wasn't around or aware yet of XP during its first 2-3 years on the market. Aside from being a significant jump in hardware requirements over the Windows 2000 it was built from, and aside from being panned as a "Fisher Price" OS, aside from the vitriolic hatred spewed by users introduced to product activation for the first time in Windows, aside from people declaring there was no reason to upgrade because Windows 2000 was the better choice and worked just fine (sound familiar?), aside from gamers sticking to Windows 9x for its superior DOS compatibility well into the 200x's, aside from all of that, well... No, that's pretty much all that needs to be said. The Cult of XP Nostalgia has been soundly and thoroughly mocked into irrelevance over the years, and the only confusing thing happening here is that for someone to be too young to remember the early days of XP, it makes no sense for them to have an old geezer attitude about technology only needing to be good-enough-for-grandma.

 

Some people out there simply have no idea what the markets are out there. They can't see beyond their own bubble of needs and wants. When a technology company starts doing something that they can't relate to, it makes them angry, and they declare it stupid and pointless and, speaking for all these imaginary people just-like-them, insist "nobody wants this". These are like the political nutcases who believe their opinions match those of the silent majority they speak for.

 

If nothing else, this guy is ready to age into dementia at his future talk radio show on an AM frequency in fly-over country.

 

I bought XP when it 1st came out. I put Windows 2000 back on my system ... err roommate stole my XP cd. Windows 2000 worked fine until around 2006.

 

.. and DOT XP has a NT kernel making it super reliable and during 2005 it was hot stuff! Windows 98 was on its way out then but still kicking. I loved XP and yes I do not remember any issues at all with it expect Trojans before Sp 2 put some DEP and hardened some of the c libraries.

 

Sorry good enough for Grandma is good enough for 90% of all users. FYI I moved off XP by 2009 to Vista then all to 7 by 2010. I have not run it on my home computers for a half decade now as it has security issues compared to Windows 7 and it lacks instant search.

 

But as angry as you and DOT want to be for 8.x not taking off the marketshare does not lie. Users want 7 and XP and only will upgrade when their hardware dies. Yes using Word and opening a tab or two is what 85% of users do. The fact that I remember Pentium IVs with 512 megs of ram as late as 2013 ring testament that the users found them acceptable.

 

Iphones and Androids make upgrading pcs less of an issue as these suite their needs better than a pc for browsing which is all a pc is used for. Office professionals make up just 1/3 of the work force believe it or not. No need for a pc besides a consumption device.

 

So no I am defending the user here. Not that I love XP but rather it meets their needs and if MS didn't stop providing security updates would not recommend changing them. Truth is truth.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hello, Hope all is well. I am in UK.  
    • I'm not happy with myself for it, but I've gone and got hold of it. Just another 45 minutes and I'll be Bond, James Bond. In my defence, IO's Hitman series is awesome, and I'm a sucker for 007. So while it might seem a bit simplified compared to Hitman, I'm sure I'll be right at home.
    • Or just check the script yourself ^^. I hate having a Microsoft account tied to my windows install.
    • 007 First Light review: Satisfying spy adventure that James Bond needed by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe I have fond memories of classic James Bond games from the Electronic Arts era. Using high-tech gadgets, sneaking into parties, and dispatching bad guys were wildly exciting activities for my younger self. In recent years, Bond games have entirely disappeared, alongside the super spy genre. Fast forward to 2020, imagine my surprise when IO Interactive announced it had secured the Bond IP to make a game. Considering the studio’s Hitman history, this project is one I keenly kept an eye on. Six years later, 007 First Light is finally here, and after spending time inside this globe-trotting adventure, I can safely say that my excitement for this developer’s take on this universe was not unfounded. IO has taken lessons it has learned from Hitman and combined them with what I would expect from a directed cinematic experience like James Bond. I have refrained from mentioning major plot points to save you from story spoilers in this review. This is an original story that doesn’t tie into any movies, so there isn’t an expectation of knowing the backstory or the decades of movies either. Bond, James Bond When 007 First Light begins, Bond is just Bond. There isn’t a spy angle, fancy gadgets, or even a secret mission. The introductory mission is framed to show how James Bond handled himself and how he does not care about the odds when it comes to saving lives. It’s a gorgeous level as well, showing off an island scattered with cliffs in the middle of a storm. Looking back, this is probably the best-looking level in the game, with IO showing off all its abilities with its custom engine, Glacier. But my favorite ended up being the follow-up to this level. Once the United Kingdom's foreign intelligence agency, MI6, recruits our daring youngster into its super-spy “00” program, training begins. However, instead of treading through the same tutorial missions where the game teaches you to run and jump and drive, IO opted for a montage, and it’s amazing. The scenes cut between Bond practicing and improving his marksmanship, parkour, hand-to-hand combat, and driving as weeks go by in his training. What impressed me here was the lack of any loading screens or stutters as scenes instantly switched to different locations entirely, as if I was watching a movie. This creativity is a trend I noticed in most levels, where there is some sort of gameplay or choreography mechanic being introduced to keep things interesting. Soon, the rest of the cast is introduced, bringing other agents that our favorite secret agent will be working with, the scientists and engineers that build MI6’s spy gadgets, as well as higher-ranking officers that either appreciate or (at best) tolerate Bond’s rebellious attitude. It’s a tight cast, all with incredibly good voice acting and personalities that quickly grew on me. The casting for Bond himself is also an excellent one. From showing his iconic soft spot for women to the condescending smiles that get a rise out of enemies, I had no issues getting immersed into this universe as this new face of James Bond. The missions take place in a wide range of locations as MI6 sends Bond to tackle dangers that are growing everywhere from the UK to Africa. These aren’t unrelated adventures where MI6 is sending secret agents, which is an angle I would love to see in another game, but a part of a bigger conspiracy affecting the entire world. Some of the twists and turns were all too predictable, and the character that Lenny Kravitz played made me cringe a little too much. But all in all, I enjoyed the campaign’s storyline that sets the stage for this new agent joining the illustrious “00” program. Plenty of Possibilities The third-person style of IO Interactive fits this role quite well. Bond is presented as a master at hand-to-hand combat as well as firearms, while also having a knack for being stealthy when required. Most sections of missions have a lot of freedom. This means I could beat up every goon and security guard on the way to an objective, slip past them without sounding a single alarm, or do a mix of both. My sessions usually end up with the third option because I tend to be impatient about waiting for a patrol to move. Drawing from its Hitman genes, the developer almost always gives multiple routes for going through missions. Levels can be massive, sometimes sporting hundreds of NPCs going their own ways and having conversations. If my objective is to break into a security room on the third floor, I could look around for roof access, eavesdrop on conversations to find out where someone lost a key, create a distraction and pickpocket a guard for a keycard, sneak in through the vents, or simply kick down the offending door. I enjoyed the variety on offer, especially because the same solutions didn’t usually show up in different missions. Before heading out into a secret MI6 escapade, the gadget specialist of the branch walks Bond through the organization's latest and greatest achievements. This can be cool little devices like a laser built into the watch, a phone that fires poison darts, or a camera that emits a powerful shockwave. The choice of what can be taken into the mission is up to the player. I could usually find fresh routes or get out of tough situations with a punch or two, so I never had the feeling of missing out by not choosing the right equipment. It’s still a fun practice. Choosing the armaments before a mission enhanced the super spy feeling quite a bit. As I mentioned, stealth comes in as a very viable option for most of the missions, letting Bond sneak past foes or knock them out silently. While it is satisfying to clear entire areas of goons and walk away without any alarms, the way of accomplishing this could have been done better. Bond can lure enemies, sneak up and knock them out, or use a gadget to disorient them before dealing a nasty blow. Bodies cannot be moved or hidden afterward either. It’s a very simple system, which I wish were more exciting to pull off. Perhaps more stealth-orientated gadgets, distraction options, or multi-takedowns could have helped here, I think. Getting caught while attempting to be in stealth does not mean a game over. Other than getting into a fist fight, an interesting twist of 007 First Light is the bluffing option. While an enemy is confused as to what you are doing in a restricted location, Bond has the option to improvise and persuade them that you are exactly where you’re supposed to be. These are fun little dynamic interactions with unique dialog depending on the mission and location, giving a few extra moments for Bond to go past suspicious guards smoothly. It’s the first time I’ve witnessed this system in a game, and I hope to see more. License to Kill Bond isn’t just dealing with security guards or civilians. From time to time, entire gangs of gun-toting mercenaries show up in levels looking to take down our protagonist. It is then that License to Kill mode is activated for Bond, letting him use firearms with no restrictions. I was surprised by just how tight gunplay is in 007 First Light. The weapons feel powerful and satisfying to fire, with single bullets capable of taking down an enemy with a headshot. Ammo is scarce, and enemies don’t drop weapons with full magazines most of the time. This forces a hectic kind of gameplay where I am always advancing towards enemies to take their weapons after they are downed. Things like shooting legs to immobilize, aiming at the hands to make their weapon go flying, blowing up nearby fire extinguishers for cover, and using gadgets to halt a goon in their tracks while I reload, make up enjoyable levels. I had to hold back my disappointment when the enemy count in these action sequences dropped to zero and I had to go non-lethal again. Speaking of action sequences, First Light isn’t just offering sandbox levels to complete at the player’s own leisure either. Each level comes with specific linear and directed scenes to move the story forward and put Bond in tight situations. These usually end up with high-octane chases or driving sections, offering the chance to witness chaining explosions, hails of gunfire, and scripted parkour scenes that remind me of Mission Impossible movies more than Bond. Elements like seeing James Bond jump out of a plane without a parachute or drive through buildings in London inside a trash truck were fantastic and always left me at a high point when finishing a mission. The classic James Bond theme is sprinkled in here too, which only happens a handful of times in the game, but at just the right moments. Visuals and Performance Compared to Unreal Engine 5 games we are seeing nowadays, 007 First Light isn’t flexing a huge amount of realism when it comes to graphics. The models, textures, and effects all feel a little dated, with the starting mission that I mentioned being the most visually striking. However, the complete lack of stutters, the hundreds of NPCs that can be on screen without a single hitch, massive sandbox levels, and smooth transitions between them all play a part in making this an immensely immersive and complex experience. The in-engine cutscenes are gorgeous as well, offering an upgraded visual style and model detail over the gameplay sections. Animations are one aspect that jumps out at me about any new game, and First Light has nailed what a third-person action game should feel like. Walking, sneaking, and running all have a heaviness to them that I appreciate. Whenever Bond moves past a wall or a ledge, his arms reach out to lightly hold those structures until he moves away. NPCs actually react to my character and move out of the way. Even during melee combat or takedown animations, the fists impacting a body or a head hitting a wall all have that same weight. Even the more frivolous animations, like catching a gun in midair or chucking an empty one at a goon (yes, you can do that), are satisfying to pull off. Of course, the in-engine cutscene animations are remarkably well done too, with facial animations and the upgraded model details improving my engagement with the characters. I have an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT 16GB paired with an eight-core Ryzen 7 3700X and 32GB of RAM, with the game running at 1440p resolution. Deciding to completely max out all the graphics options gave me a range of frame rates between 60 and 100 depending on the scene and level. While I did try to enable AMD FSR, which bumped up the frame rates by a good 20% at Quality mode, IO Interactive’s implementation of the technology wasn’t that great. Every corner and edge in levels began shimmering, and I was also seeing smearing issues in fast-moving sections. The title seemingly uses the older generation FSR 3.1 and not the machine learning-assisted FSR 4, leading to these artifacts. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to manually upgrade this right now either. I opted to turn off the upscaling and play the game in native 1440p to avoid problems. I would say the FPS range I was getting was an acceptable one for a single-player action game for my setup. I do wish there were an FOV slider option in the settings. While the camera is far enough back for my tastes in most situations in this third-person adventure, at times the perspective is far too close. When trying to look around quickly and spot targets, I realized I was getting a slight headache at times due to the use of an almost over-the-shoulder close-up camera. Conclusion Being James Bond in 007 First Light is a treat. Traveling around the world chasing conspiracies, using high-tech gadgets disguised as everyday accessories, and improvising on the spot to fool foes all give a fantastic feeling of being a super spy. For an origin story, IO Interactive has done a great job at introducing the character and his motives for doing what he does. The satisfying combat animation and fantastic voice acting are definitely high points, with the License to Kill moments being my favorite. Not being able to move bodies and the simplistic stealth of mechanics does hurt its presentation a little. The NPC logic and intelligence is easy to manipulate and trick, repeating the same actions over and over again if I keep making distractions. The lack of an FOV slider was also a pain (quite literally) at times, and the FSR implementation is quite poor. These are things I hope the studio will improve upon with updates. Even with its faults, IO Interactive and James Bond are a match made in heaven. The studio knows how to make a main character that oozes charm and competency while also leaning heavily into its Hitman experience to make gigantic levels with what looks like hundreds of NPCs roaming around. Being an origin story, IO’s Bond has a way to go before he becomes the highly effective agent we see in the movie world. I am hoping the studio will continue this series alongside its Hitman ventures going forward, just so we get to experience the journey for longer. 007 First Light is available on PC (Steam, Epic Games Store, and Xbox PC), Xbox Series X|S, and PlayStation 5 for $69.99. This review was conducted on the PC version of the game provided by IO Interactive.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Rising Star
      olavinto went up a rank
      Rising Star
    • One Month Later
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      lamborghiniv10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      X-No-file earned a badge
      Reacting Well
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      271
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      75
    4. 4
      Skyfrog
      74
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!