Support NeoGAF

[NickFire]

Replying to your unfounded "concerns" with evidence isn't me not being chill.

And 120fps probably won't work via the cloud any time soon. That's not the point of cloud gaming. Cloud gaming is intended to be supplemental and Microsoft has always communicated that dedicated local hardware is the way to go for your primary gaming experiences.

As for Redfall, it sucks but it's one game from a developer with a bit of a shoddy historical track record for performance. And they've already said 60fps is coming later.

How is cloud gaming going to be supplemental if they are honestly trying to expand access to 150 million more people? COD was already on PC, so where are these new people going to play?

Sounds like cloud is integral for their business plans in that context to me. Disagree all day long. But I'm taking them at their word on intent.

 

[analog_future]

How is cloud gaming going to be supplemental if they are honestly trying to expand access to 150 million more people? COD was already on PC, so where are these new people going to play?

Sounds like cloud is integral for their business plans in that context to me. Disagree all day long. But I'm taking them at their word on intent.

I mean, Switch is at 125 million in sales. Maybe that 150 million number comes from where Microsoft estimates Switch sales will be by the time Call of Duty starts coming to Switch in a couple years.

 

[NickFire]

I mean, Switch is at 125 million in sales. Maybe that 150 million number comes from where Microsoft estimates Switch sales will be by the time Call of Duty starts coming to Switch in a couple years.

The possibility of a Switch port does not make me more optimistic that the framerate I currently play on will be a continued priority.

Anyway, I'll gladly change my opinion if MS gives me reason to after they buy it. As long as its available on my console and still up to par, I won't be quitting COD.

 

[adamsapple]

The possibility of a Switch port does not make me more optimistic that the framerate I currently play on will be a continued priority.

Anyway, I'll gladly change my opinion if MS gives me reason to after they buy it. As long as its available on my console and still up to par, I won't be quitting COD.

If a game's base target is lower-end hardware, it automatically means the likely-hood of the bigger consoles getting better frame rates is a lot higher.

Why did we get so many 60 and 120hz games this gen so far? Cause almost all of them were cross-gen.

Games like Flight Sim, Gotham Knights, Plague Tale etc which are new-gen *only* are starting to veer back into 30 FPS only categories, with an occasional 40hz or the promise of a post-launch 60 FPS update ala Redfall.

If frame rate is your top priority over IQ or texture resolution, then cross-gen is your best bet.

 

[NickFire]

If a game's base target is lower-end hardware, it automatically means the likely-hood of the bigger consoles getting better frame rates is a lot higher.

Why did we get so many 60 and 120hz games this gen so far? Cause almost all of them were cross-gen.

Games like Flight Sim, Gotham Knights, Plague Tale etc which are new-gen *only* are starting to veer back into 30 FPS only categories, with an occasional 40hz or the promise of a post-launch 60 FPS update ala Redfall.

If frame rate is your top priority over IQ or texture resolution, then cross-gen is your best bet.

I'm not sure where you are going with this beyond adopting the new talking point that 30 FPS will become standard.

Honest question, what are you actually suggesting? Is it that COD will somehow become a better game by reducing the base target to Switch's chipset? I mean, you are probably right in terms of pure frame per second. But at what cost to the game itself?

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'm not sure where you are going with this beyond adopting the new talking point that 30 FPS will become standard.

The most powerful console Xbox ever flexing, being reduced to 30FPS will become standard. Got to love gaming's ever shifting copium talking points.

 

[ByWatterson]

Here's a real question I asked elsewhere: ABK deal is meant to bolster Gamepass, right? And having Diablo and Crash and all of Call of Duty in Gamepass is very, very attractive.

But I'd say at least half of Call of Duty users buy one game a year - COD. Paying $180 per year (need Gold/Ultimate for online play) doesn't make any sense for that COD user when they're already mostly on PlayStation and can just pay for the title plus PS+ Essential, which is a much better service than Live Gold.

Like.....will the ABK deal - or more specifically the acquisition of COD - actually move that many subscriptions for Microsoft?

 

[adamsapple]

I'm not sure where you are going with this beyond adopting the new talking point that 30 FPS will become standard.

Honest question, what are you actually suggesting? Is it that COD will somehow become a better game by reducing the base target to Switch's chipset? I mean, you are probably right in terms of pure frame per second. But at what cost to the game itself?

No, I'm very specifically replying to your one concern about being worried about the frame rates that you're playing the games on right now.

As of right now, the only games that do not have a 60 FPS option are exclusive to the new generation.

It's a very fair assumption that this will happen more and more as we start ditching cross gen projects, I'm sure anyone can reasonably expect and see this happening not just me.

 

[NickFire]

No, I'm very specifically replying to your one concern about being worried about the frame rates that you're playing the games on right now.

As of right now, the only games that do not have a 60 FPS option are exclusive to the new generation.

It's a very fair assumption that this will happen more and more as we start ditching cross gen projects, I'm sure anyone can reasonably expect and see this happening not just me.

So you're saying don't worry about losing 120 FPS and be grateful if we still get 60? Am I missing something?

 

[adamsapple]

So you're saying don't worry about losing 120 FPS and be grateful if we still get 60? Am I missing something?

No you're not missing something, just being obtuse.

You used a hypothetical switch version as an example of why you will be worried about continued frame rate priority, a weaker base hardware means that the stronger consoles will naturally have higher frame rate options.

 

[NickFire]

No you're not missing something, just being obtuse.

You used a hypothetical switch version as an example of why you will be worried about continued frame rate priority, a weaker base hardware means that the stronger consoles will naturally have higher frame rate options.

You cherry picked one response in a longer conversation to tell me 30 FPS is going to be standard, and called me obtuse for "not missing something" in your own words.

Sure feels like you came in just to regurgitate a new talking point.

 

[adamsapple]

Sure feels like you came in just to regurgitate a new talking point.

As opposed to you regurgitating this ?

They just announced their next big shooting game will be 30 fps. Reasonable minds may disagree, but it feels like they have shifted into rush games out the door mode to me. Even some of their biggest fans are squeamish about it.

A game, franchise and developer that has nothing to do with Activision or CoD and talk about 'rushing games' for an example that was already given a 12 month extension ?

 

[PaintTinJr]

This is all pure speculation on your part. Ubisoft have said multiple times that is not the case.

Also, we already covered DF in earlier posts, the game was dropping to 20 FPS on PS4 and even the cut-scenes where the PS4's extra GPU grunt came more useful, were barely hitting 30. Hence they had to make massive cut-backs to get the game running on a better state in Syncidate.




Ok, you're welcome to ask Sony to provide these receipts you're talking about. Until we do, everything you're saying on the matter is nothing but your own subjective speculation with no basis in reality.

The AC games are so forgettable for me from 4 onwards I must have got them round the wrong way although the 900p was consistent with the marketing deal it seems.

But thE cross gen Black flag (first AC on X1/PS4) article is about the ps4 getting patched to full HD - after much uproar.
Checkout this comment from the article

"This cracks me up. Remember all those quotes from an article last week about how 1080p can't just be implemented out of thin air even if the technicalities allow, but a game must be built around it from its initial design.

Yeah. Sure. Lets just patch it up.

Im not complaining. Just saying..."

Xbox one was still stuck at 900p because of the esram, and that should evidence the idea of just how much crap Ubisoft said, compared to reality.

And here's the collective damage of that initial parity (in the comments) for both, and even a reference to Ghost(Cod) single player state when Xbox had the marketing IIRC.

"I thought this game was already 1080p on the PS4?!?

With this and Call of Duty: Ghosts' single player running sub-1080p, how many other games are going to require Day One patches, I wonder? I mean, yes, it's good that they're patching the games but the more stories I read like this the more I'm convinced that neither new console was really ready to launch this year. ..... "

https://web.archive.org/web/2022052...te-will-upgrade-resolution-from-900p-to-1080p

https://www.eurogamer.net/assassins...pgrade-resolution-from-900p-to-1080p#comments

Then we have an indies Parity article (I can source) showing parity was in Xbox contract, with a comment of the time referring to other parity - because they will have read the same article I read at the time.

"So,the parity clause does still exist.

Lovely Microsoft.

Phil finally tells the deluded about DX12 too. http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/10/08/xbox-boss-talks-xbox-ones-cloud-backwards-compatibility-and-gives-a-honest-answer-on-directx-12/"

https://web.archive.org/web/2022042...se-exists-so-xbox-one-owners-feel-first-class

https://www.eurogamer.net/microsoft...-so-xbox-one-owners-feel-first-class#comments

And to reinforce my point about getting receipts, that article link about directX12 in the last eurogamer comment I quoted is a dead link and I only managed to recover it once via archive.org's straining servers, so even that interview might be another lost receipt for something else.

 

[POKEYCLYDE]

Here's a real question I asked elsewhere: ABK deal is meant to bolster Gamepass, right? And having Diablo and Crash and all of Call of Duty in Gamepass is very, very attractive.

But I'd say at least half of Call of Duty users buy one game a year - COD. Paying $180 per year (need Gold/Ultimate for online play) doesn't make any sense for that COD user when they're already mostly on PlayStation and can just pay for the title plus PS+ Essential, which is a much better service than Live Gold.

Like.....will the ABK deal - or more specifically the acquisition of COD - actually move that many subscriptions for Microsoft?

I don't think it's about stealing users from Playstation, rather swaying undecided customers.

There will be a small percentage of hardcore CoD players who jump ship for the double exp weekend bullshit that inevitably comes to Xbox when Sony loses the marketing rights. A small percentage may also jump ship because of the great value proposition of Gamepass.

But wider Microsoft goals include mobile. Candy crush and CoD mobile are a great first step into that market.

Regardless of if this acquisition actually meets Microsoft's goals, ABK generates massive amounts of revenue and profit. If the Xbox division was as unprofitable as some people here believe, this acquisition turns that around. Makes the Xbox division self sustaining really.

But subscriptions, I think there'll be a boost, but there won't be a large boon until a new generation comes out.

 

[adamsapple]

The AC games are so forgettable for me from 4 onwards I must have got them round the wrong way although the 900p was consistent with the marketing deal it seems.

But thE cross gen Black flag (first AC on X1/PS4) article is about the ps4 getting patched to full HD - after much uproar.
Checkout this comment from the article

First of all, user comments are a useless metric.

Secondly, Black Flag was cross-gen, not a new game made for new hardware.

And finally, if it were possible and they did it on one AC game, they would have done the same for Unity as well.

This is not the evidence you think it is.

Then we have an indies Parity article (I can source) showing parity was in Xbox contract, with a comment of the time referring to other parity - because they will have read the same article I read at the time.

https://web.archive.org/web/2022042...se-exists-so-xbox-one-owners-feel-first-class

https://www.eurogamer.net/microsoft...-so-xbox-one-owners-feel-first-class#comments

The indies parity was for release date parity, and releasing the game and content at the same time on Xbox or not at all, it had nothing to do with tech.

This was already covered before.

And to reinforce my point about getting receipts, that article link about directX12 in the last eurogamer comment I quoted is a dead link and I only managed to recover it once via archive.org's straining servers, so even that interview might be another lost receipt for something else.

ok.

 

[NickFire]

As opposed to you regurgitating this ?




A game, franchise and developer that has nothing to do with Activision or CoD and talk about 'rushing games' for an example that was already given a 12 month extension ?

Suggesting it has no relevance suggests it is not a MS first party game being rushed out the door. That is a false premise.

 

[adamsapple]

Suggesting it has no relevance suggests it is not a MS first party game being rushed out the door. That is a false premise.

The only false premise is trying to draw a parallel between two completely unrelated examples my friend. What does a game developed by Arkane have to do with a hypothetical CoD deveoped by Treyarch or Infinity Ward that may or may not be on Switch or future Nintendo hardware ?

And, once again, the example of the game you are using was originally scheduled to come out Summer 2022. It was given a full 12 month extension.

If this is what you call rushing out the door, then that's a very skewed definition of the phrase.

I think I'm gonna drop this point here as you're just drawing a parallel where none logically exists.

 

[NickFire]

The only false premise is trying to draw a parallel between two completely unrelated examples my friend. What does a game developed by Arkane have to do with a hypothetical CoD deveoped by Treyarch or Infinity Ward that may or may not be on Switch or future Nintendo hardware ?

And, once again, the example of the game you are using was originally scheduled to come out Summer 2022. It was given a full 12 month extension.

If this is what you call rushing out the door, then that's a very skewed definition of the phrase.

It's being released unfinished. That is rushing a game out the door all day long in my opinion. And the publisher is the publisher. It does not matter which studio the publisher releases an unfinished game from. The publisher still controls that all day long.

 

[PaintTinJr]

First of all, user comments are a useless metric.

Secondly, Black Flag was cross-gen, not a new game made for new hardware.

And finally, if it were possible and they did it on one AC game, they would have done the same for Unity as well.

This is not the evidence you think it is.




The indies parity was for release date parity, and releasing the game and content at the same time on Xbox or not at all, it had nothing to do with tech.

This was already covered before.




ok.

Cross-gen is what proves the 900p issue was Xbox one's and its alone. It couldn't even do cross-gen AC higher than 900p.

But even after the Xbox one having no Rapid pack maths, being hundreds of GFLOP/s short, even with FP32, it had just two ACE (asynchronous compute engines) and the PS4 offloaded things like audio onto the GPU using its excess of ACES - from the CPU - and yet you claim nonsense that the Xbox one CPU was stronger which caused the 900p on bot,, despite having to do extra work for esram/DDR setup. This shows either you have no idea, or will argue any angle that justifies the shenanigans that go on behind the scenes with contracts IMHO.

 

[adamsapple]

Cross-gen is what proves the 900p issue was Xbox one's and its alone. It couldn't even do cross-gen AC higher than 900p.

But even after the Xbox one having no Rapid pack maths, being hundreds of GFLOP/s short, even with FP32, it had just two ACE (asynchronous compute engines) and the PS4 offloaded things like audio onto the GPU using its excess of ACES - from the CPU - and yet you claim nonsense that the Xbox one CPU was stronger which caused the 900p on bot,, despite having to do extra work for esram/DDR setup. This shows either you have no idea, or will argue any angle that justifies the shenanigans that go on behind the scenes with contracts IMHO.

My friend, relax. I don't claim anything. I have explicitly used Digital Foundry's quotes.

PS4 had a stronger GPU, but XBO had a slightly stronger CPU, that much we can see via the specs.

AC Unity had a distinct performance advantage on Xbox in game play and PS4 in cut-scenes where the GPU got more utilization. This is covered in multiple DF articles for both Unity and Syndicate.

These are facts, not opinions based on theoretical computational power of either console.

 

[feynoob]

Here's a real question I asked elsewhere: ABK deal is meant to bolster Gamepass, right? And having Diablo and Crash and all of Call of Duty in Gamepass is very, very attractive.

But I'd say at least half of Call of Duty users buy one game a year - COD. Paying $180 per year (need Gold/Ultimate for online play) doesn't make any sense for that COD user when they're already mostly on PlayStation and can just pay for the title plus PS+ Essential, which is a much better service than Live Gold.

Like.....will the ABK deal - or more specifically the acquisition of COD - actually move that many subscriptions for Microsoft?

Yes. Because COD will give gamepass more exposure for casuals.

But the main thing is that COD gives MS more power to get bigger games.

Right now, gamepass doesn't have a must buy game day1 outside of Xbox 1st party games. It can't get games like Valhalla day1 because of that. Activitision library changes that equation.

 

[feynoob]

Ass of Can Whooping

 

[adamsapple]

New analysis (credit Idas)

Microsoft-Activision Merger Should Be Allowed To Proceed - Law360

The Federal Trade Commission's recent complaint against the announced merger between Microsoft and Activision is flawed, and the merger should be allowed to proceed as it does not violate any existing antitrust laws, says James Skyles at Skyles Law.

www.law360.com

Assuming precedent remains consistent, it is clear that the current FTC complaint suffers from similar defects to that in Meta Platforms. While the FTC will succeed in defining a market definition and showing a prime facie case of anticompetition, additional scrutiny will likely favor Microsoft.

First, it is likely that there will be little dispute over market definition — the FTC has stated that the merger is vertical, and given vertical mergers are often less harmful than horizontal, this is unlikely to pose a point of controversy. Moreover, Microsoft's current response acknowledges the FTC's concession.

Second, just as in Meta Platforms, it is likely that a court will find sufficient evidence to allow the FTC to move to additional scrutiny. Microsoft certainly has the ability to harm Sony — at least in theory — by restricting access to Call of Duty.

And while Microsoft has not identified alternative products to substitute Call of Duty, it has offered to provide Sony with the game, as it already has done with Nintendo Co. Ltd.
However, a court would still likely agree there is some evidence of possible harm, given other games that Activision controls, including Diablo and Overwatch.
However, the FTC's arguments that the merger would in effect substantially lessen competition will likely fail. The FTC has only provided speculation about what Microsoft could possibly do, theoretically engage in monopolistic behavior without providing any evidence, direct or circumstantial that they would.

While Microsoft could rescind access to Diablo and Overwatch from Sony, there is no evidence it will do so. In fact, circumstantial evidence points to the very opposite conclusion, Microsoft promising to provide Sony with Activision's Call of Duty, which undercuts the theory of monopolistic behavior.

Microsoft may also be able to point out counterfactuals to demonstrate a merger with Activision will not threaten the current marketplace. As Microsoft has argued in their response, both Sony and Nintendo represent the majority of the market; moreover, Microsoft's Xbox continues to lag behind Sony and Nintendo.

If Microsoft can effectively demonstrate the relatively superior market representation of Nintendo and Sony, it is unlikely that the FTC will be able to demonstrate monopolistic behavior.
Finally, a number of academics have also noted that courts actually examine the effects on consumers as a whole, rather than competitors. Should this be true, it is even less likely the FTC will prevail, given Microsoft's relatively weak market position.

 

[DeepEnigma]

 

[MasterCornholio]

Ass of Can Whooping

He pulled the trigger.

 

[feynoob]

Finally, a number of academics have also noted that courts actually examine the effects on consumers as a whole, rather than competitors. Should this be true, it is even less likely the FTC will prevail, given Microsoft's relatively weak market position.

 

[feynoob]

He pulled the trigger.

I warned him. That profile is not good. It claimed him 2 times.
I am afraid that our boy is going to get possessed by that profile.

 

[Mr Moose]

First of all, user comments are a useless metric.

Secondly, Black Flag was cross-gen, not a new game made for new hardware.

And finally, if it were possible and they did it on one AC game, they would have done the same for Unity as well.

This is not the evidence you think it is.

We decided to lock them at the same specs to avoid all the debates and stuff

Quote from Ass Creed Unity producer.

 

[adamsapple]

Quote from Ass Creed Unity producer.

Ubisoft says it didn't lower PS4 Assassin's Creed Unity resolution to force parity

"We understand how Senior Producer Vincent Pontbriand's quotes have been misinterpreted."

www.videogamer.com

"We understand how Senior Producer Vincent Pontbriand's quotes have been misinterpreted," Ubisoft said in a statement provided to Kotaku. "To set the record straight, we did not lower the specs for Assassin's Creed Unity to account for any one system over the other.

"At no point did we decide to reduce the ambitions of any SKU," it continues. "All benefited from the full dedication of all of our available optimization resources to help them reach the level of quality we have today with the core Assassin's Creed Unity experience."

 

[Mr Moose]

Ubisoft says it didn't lower PS4 Assassin's Creed Unity resolution to force parity

"We understand how Senior Producer Vincent Pontbriand's quotes have been misinterpreted."

www.videogamer.com

That's called backtracking.

 

[adamsapple]

That's called backtracking.

I mean, sure, you are free to believe that, but I'll once again refer you to the actual state of the game. Stretches of 20 FPS and generally much worse performance on average. Imagine if they had forced the game at 1080p, it would have incurred extra GPU drops on top its already bad performance.

Would it have been better as a 1080p game with an average of sub 20 FPS ? No.

 

[Mr Moose]

I mean, sure, you are free to believe that, but I'll once again refer you to the actual state of the game. Stretches of 20 FPS and generally much worse performance on average. Imagine if they had forced the game at 1080p, it would have incurred extra GPU drops on top its already bad performance.

Would it have been better as a 1080p game with an average of sub 20 FPS ? No.

It would still run like shit at 720p.

to avoid all the debates and stuff

Says all I need to know about it.

 

[adamsapple]

It would still run like shit at 720p.

Says all I need to know about it.

This says all I need to know about it.

"We understand how Senior Producer Vincent Pontbriand's quotes have been misinterpreted," Ubisoft said in a statement provided to Kotaku. "To set the record straight, we did not lower the specs for Assassin's Creed Unity to account for any one system over the other.

If they could, they would have patched it to 1080p like Black Flag.

 

[Mr Moose]

This says all I need to know about it.



If they could, they would have patched it to 1080p like Black Flag.

Yeah "to avoid all the debates and stuff" taken completely out of context and misinterpreted.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Yeah "to avoid all the debates and stuff" taken completely out of context and misinterpreted.

Funny how debates still happen today over it.

 

[adamsapple]

Yeah "to avoid all the debates and stuff" taken completely out of context and misinterpreted.

I agree, the 'avoid the debates' thing is taken out of context. In the full interview he's talking about FPS, not resolutions. The debate is about acceptable performance metrics.

Funny how debates still happen today over it.

Also, why are we just talking about Unity. Syndicate was also 900p on both lol.

I disagree with the whole discussion in the first place, ubisoft =/= MS.

 

[MasterCornholio]

I agree, the 'avoid the debates' thing is taken out of context. In the full interview he's talking about FPS, not resolutions. The debate is about acceptable performance metrics.

Also, why are we just talking about Unity. Syndicate was also 900p on both lol.

I disagree with the whole discussion in the first place, ubisoft =/= MS.

I don't believe the X1 and the PS4 were equal. At least not as close as the PS5 and the XSX are. Which is why the differences were a bit bigger in that generation.

Why both were 900P that's for you to decide.

 

[bentanchorbolt]

I don't believe the X1 and the PS4 were equal. At least not as close as the PS5 and the XSX are. Which is why the differences were a bit bigger in that generation.

Why both were 900P that's for you to decide.

In nearly every case it was the Xbox One running at a lower resolution with lesser quality effects, and in games that were CPU limited it was always the Xbox One that had the slight edge. The performance numbers throughout the generation were very in keeping with the specs of both systems in most cases. The crummy part is that games which didn't see a One X version and now very hard to play. MGSV @ 900p looks downright awful on the Xbox Series X, while the same game at 1080p on the PS5 looks vastly better.

 

[fred420170]

That ad makes me sad for COD's future. I just don't see any chance they keep the 120 FPS option that we currently enjoy when MS wants it running on Switch, cloud, or a web browser, and is even willing to rush games before they can run at 60 FPS like Redfall. Their intent and recent track record just does not compute with high performance IMO.

What makes me sad for COD's future is the BS pay to win loadouts being sold in season 3... now that's concerning... And wtf does redfall have to do with the aquisition or COD? LOL

 

[feynoob]

Off topic: Anyone here knows python?

Spoiler: I am having issue with a specific college assignment.

Write a recursive function called print_num_pattern() to output the following number pattern.

Given a positive integer as input (Ex: 12), subtract another positive integer (Ex: 3) continually until a negative value is reached, and then continually add the second integer until the first integer is again reached. For this lab, do not end output with a newline.

Do not modify the given main program.

Ex. If the input is:

12
3

the output is:

12 9 6 3 0 -3 0 3 6 9 12

I typed the code, but it not giving me the negative output in the task.
Here is my code.

# TODO: Write recursive print_num_pattern() function
def print_num_pattern(num1, num2):
if num1 < 0:
print(num1, end=' ')
print_num_pattern(num1 + num2, num2)
elif num1 == 0:
print(num1, end=' ')
else:
print(num1, end=' ')
print_num_pattern(num1 - num2, num2)
if num1 != num2:
print(num1, end=' ')

if __name__ == "__main__":
num1 = int(input())
num2 = int(input())
print_num_pattern(num1, num2)

Will appreciate the help.

 

[Jemm]

Off topic: Anyone here knows python?

Spoiler: I am having issue with a specific college assignment.

Write a recursive function called print_num_pattern() to output the following number pattern.

Given a positive integer as input (Ex: 12), subtract another positive integer (Ex: 3) continually until a negative value is reached, and then continually add the second integer until the first integer is again reached. For this lab, do not end output with a newline.

Do not modify the given main program.

Ex. If the input is:

12
3

the output is:

12 9 6 3 0 -3 0 3 6 9 12

I typed the code, but it not giving me the negative output in the task.
Here is my code.

# TODO: Write recursive print_num_pattern() function
def print_num_pattern(num1, num2):
if num1 < 0:
print(num1, end=' ')
print_num_pattern(num1 + num2, num2)
elif num1 == 0:
print(num1, end=' ')
else:
print(num1, end=' ')
print_num_pattern(num1 - num2, num2)
if num1 != num2:
print(num1, end=' ')

if __name__ == "__main__":
num1 = int(input())
num2 = int(input())
print_num_pattern(num1, num2)

Will appreciate the help.

I don't know Python, but asked Bing Chat for the solution:

"Here is a solution to the problem using Python:

Spoiler: Solution(?)

def print_num_pattern(num1, num2):
    print(num1, end=' ')
    if num1 - num2 > 0:
        print_num_pattern(num1 - num2, num2)
    print(num1, end=' ')

# Example
print_num_pattern(12, 3)

This code defines a recursive function print_num_pattern() that takes two arguments: num1 and num2. The function prints the value of num1, then checks if num1 - num2 is greater than 0. If it is, the function calls itself with the new value of num1 as num1 - num2. This continues until num1 - num2 is no longer greater than 0. At this point, the function starts printing the values of num1 again as it returns from each recursive call.

The example at the end of the code shows how to call the function with the values 12 and 3 as input. The output is: 12 9 6 3 0 -3 0 3 6 9 12."

 

[GHound]

Alright maybe dial it down a bit there MS, lol.

You mean you don't want to read the autobiography "How I Brought Call of Duty to 150 MILLION More Gamers," The New York Times® Best Seller by Phil Spencer?

 

[feynoob]

I don't know Python, but asked Bing Chat for the solution:

"Here is a solution to the problem using Python:

Spoiler: Solution(?)

def print_num_pattern(num1, num2):
    print(num1, end=' ')
    if num1 - num2 > 0:
        print_num_pattern(num1 - num2, num2)
    print(num1, end=' ')

# Example
print_num_pattern(12, 3)

This code defines a recursive function print_num_pattern() that takes two arguments: num1 and num2. The function prints the value of num1, then checks if num1 - num2 is greater than 0. If it is, the function calls itself with the new value of num1 as num1 - num2. This continues until num1 - num2 is no longer greater than 0. At this point, the function starts printing the values of num1 again as it returns from each recursive call.

The example at the end of the code shows how to call the function with the values 12 and 3 as input. The output is: 12 9 6 3 0 -3 0 3 6 9 12."

I tried that one. It gives me either a positive one or too much output, which the grading system can't grade it.

 

[MisterXDTV]

If every decision was made based on MS current market position, then what's stopping them from buying every third-party publisher on the market to create a monopoly???

It doesn't make any sense...

They should make decisions based on the possible consequences of the acquisition, not what happened BEFORE it

 

[feynoob]

If every decision was made based on MS current market position, then what's stopping them from buying every third-party publisher on the market to create a monopoly???

It doesn't make any sense...

They should make decisions based on the possible consequences of the acquisition, not what happened BEFORE it

If this deal gets approved, that market would change. Meaning they won't be able to buy EA or other giants.

There would be a limit to how much publishers they can buy.

Regulators aren't stupid. This defense might work on this purchase, but not future purchase after this.

 

[Heisenberg007]

If every decision was made based on MS current market position, then what's stopping them from buying every third-party publisher on the market to create a monopoly???

It doesn't make any sense...

They should make decisions based on the possible consequences of the acquisition, not what happened BEFORE it

True. Also, it's not Sony's and Nintendo's fault that Xbox hasn't been able to improve its position in the last 20 years because of the bad business decisions they continue to make.

At the end of the 7th generation, both PS3 and Xbox 360 had a similar market share (84 million vs. 88 million). Xbox fumbled because of its own mistakes. Now they want their competitors to take a hit because of Xbox's bad decisions.

 

[zapper]

what's the latest news? I find it very unlikely that it won't go through after the turnaround of the cma on the console market, I imagine that next week we will already have some leaks on the remedies that will hardly provide for a divestment of activision. I don't understand why microsoft is sponsoring the deal in the london underground though, it seems like pointless marketing at this point

 

[Thirty7ven]

The deal is 100% done, the checks have cleared.

 

[mansoor1980]

rich boy phil spencer cant be stopped

 

[reksveks]

what's the latest news? I find it very unlikely that it won't go through after the turnaround of the cma on the console market, I imagine that next week we will already have some leaks on the remedies that will hardly provide for a divestment of activision. I don't understand why microsoft is sponsoring the deal in the london underground though, it seems like pointless marketing at this point

No news in the last week, really since the updated cma PF really.

There was some stuff around the gamers lawsuit but not particularly meaningful