I haven't played Starfield so I can't say for sure, but I think people hate that the world is divided into instances rather than being seamless and associate loading screens with that critique... probably.
Nice to see that they're efficient loading screens, though!
I know the drawbacks, if I lose anything that I put on RAID0 it's a minor inconvenience at best - in fact, the two hard drives on RAID0 I mentioned are quite old and I'm not sure how long I can expect them to last (not that I use them often).
I'd rather take two SATAs, I have a cheap docking station with two SATA slots (currently housing hard disks) and putting them together on a RAID0 almost doubles a single one's performance.
I could buy a docking station with two NVMe slots, it would be wise too, but then again, two NVMe SSDs would be faster than one, and again, it may or may not be worth the slight (potential) increase in price and decrease in reliability - especially considering the diminishing returns.
I can confirm that fully moving Windows from a HDD to an SSD makes all the difference in the world; for some reason, W10 and especially W11 are astoundingly slow on hard disks.
I have a W11 VM, and if I run it on a SATA SSD it boots up in ~30s; HDD, the same image on a HDD takes approximately 5 minutes to get to the login screen, then no less than 2 minutes to run applications.Even considering that I disabled paging files.
I know DirectStorage helps with read performance, I can't use it because Linux, and I'm not intrested in running benchmarks for the heck of it - I would rather like to know how much storage speed affects loading times in your (or anyone's) experience, in practical scenarios, with all the CPU-bound, GPU-bound, memory-bound and network-bound loads affecting your (or anyone's) average gaming session.
I'm not necessarily talking about SATA or NVMe SSDs specifically, not even SSDs specifically; I think you could theoretically surpass an NVMe SSD's speed with large enough RAID0 setups of hard drives, if you ignore seek times and some other factors.... if you're asking what SSDs I have, unfortunately they're all SATA :c
I don't share the feeling. I'll gladly tie a M$ shareholder to a chair, force them to watch me play Perfect Dark, and say "man I love these AI settings, I wish they made AI like they used to".
The term "Artificial Intelligence" has been around for a long time, 25 years ago AI was an acceptable name for NPC logic in videogames. Arguably that's still the case, and personally I vastly prefer "Artificial Intelligence" to "Broad Simulation Of Common Sense Powered By Von Neumann Machines".
In defense of people who say LLMs are not intelligent: they probably mean to say they are not sapient, and I think they're loosely correct if you consider the literal word "intelligent" to have a different meaning from the denotative "Intelligence" in the context of Artificial Intelligence.
~0.4889 / 7 chance of failure, naively accounting for Windows' market share and assuming the user is sufficiently privileged~ (according to LostXOR's comment, I stand corrected)
I haven't played Starfield so I can't say for sure, but I think people hate that the world is divided into instances rather than being seamless and associate loading screens with that critique... probably.
Nice to see that they're efficient loading screens, though!