You react to small disagreements with insults, accusations of the user being a fed and threats of censorship (banning him because you disagree with him). I have no idea if you’re an admin on lemmy and actually have the power to do this, but this is fairly downvoteable in my view.

And it’s not like the output is saved for the next time; you need to do it every time.

You can cache transcoded content in Jellyfin. So use a large enough cache and you basically only have to transcode once for every resolution. It’s easier for me to set up transcoding than it would be to manually figure out which resolutions I’ll prefer having around and transcoding them. Most of my stuff exists in 1080p, with 4k files for stuff I REALLY like, but I sometimes find myself watching on very low resolutions on my phone when away because I have pretty limited data.

I find that in a few movies the 4K versions have a generally better image quality and are worth it even if you are sitting far away or not watching the content in 4K resolution at all. But like you, I only keep around 4k files for stuff I really like.

EDIT: I’ve also run into problems with codecs on other people’s devices when not transcoding. I could keep my files in whatever the most compatible codec is nowadays but having the ability to transcode on the spot is easier.

What specifically isn’t working? I’ve got Jellyfin running on Docker with transcoding from a Nvidia GPU.

I pretty much followed the documentation here: https://jellyfin.org/docs/general/administration/hardware-acceleration/nvidia. I can share my docker-compose for that specific use case if you’d like.

I think those miniPC CPUs do a good job transcoding from what I’ve read, the N95 and N100. I already had older hardware set up when I added Jellyfin so I got a cheap nvidia Quadro P400 for the transcoding. If you’re setting up a new system though, I’d guess a Intel iGPU would be more than enough.

I’ve looked at https://www.elpamsoft.com/?p=Plex-Hardware-Transcoding before for transcoding comparisons.

Boring answer, but I play on the PC exclusively. When I’m not playing, I’m usually already using the PC for other stuff, so it’s a faster switch than jumping to some other device. I thought about getting a Steam Deck for a while, but I gravitate so much towards the PC that I think I’d probably put it down after a while.

There’s usually “routine” games I’ll play during the week when I have little time - which are usually games that are unlikely to receive any big updates - and I’ll leave new games to moments when I know I can sit down for a long while without worries.

The PC I use for gaming is practically only a gaming box, though. I don’t tinker with it nearly as much as I used to. And I’ve started using a controller more, when that’s an option.

I’d say yes, not necessarily because of the story ties, but because there’s progression in the gameplay itself. So playing the second one after the first one will feel like an upgrade in gameplay. Whereas if you decide to play this one right now and at the end you’re left wanting for more, going back to the first one might feel like a slight downgrade (even though I love it as well).

I recently played Metro Exodus and I felt like it was a drag at the beginning of the game instead. It was one of the few times in my life in which 1 hour into the game I was so bored I was googling whether the game would eventually get going and become fun. The story “twist” at the beginning felt extremely rushed and out of nowhere and it sort of put me off. But as the game got going I got very into it and I was the one “dragging” it by doing every secondary objective.

I’ve been playing Cities Skylines a lot - got pulled back in with all the talk about the new one - and also Going Under.

Going Under is one of those games I bought a while ago because it seemed fun, played for a bit, got my ass kicked more than what I was used to with roguelites and stopped for a while. I started playing it again recently and think it finally made sense to me. Looking back, I probably wasn’t paying much attention to the game the first time I tried it because I didn’t understand there was an indication for weapon damage on different weapons - which made weapon choice feel random - and I also didn’t understand how the mentor system worked - which is a big part of the strategy of the game. I’ve been having a lot of fun with it now, though.

I tried to play the original System Shock two/three years ago but gave up at a stage that felt very close to the end. I basically had a save at a weird spot, when I was low on ammo and anything else useful, right between two complicated rooms. I reloaded a ton of times and always died trying to go forwards or backwards before giving up.

Anyway, would you recommend System Shock Remaster for someone who likely almost completed the original one, gave up, but still liked it overall? Or is there something shockingly different about the original’s ending I’ll be missing?

I typically only buy games on discount some years after they’ve launched. I’ll sometimes make an exception for indie games that come out which seem like exactly my kind of game. And I made an exception for Battlebit as well - I bought it immediately after I saw the first person playing it because it seemed like ultra fun, and I’ve probably already played more of it than all Battlefield games combined over the years.