* Diablo 3 had too many numbers appearing on screen.

I played D3 (didn't pay the full game price and did not by anything for else) alone until I finished the main quests (Master) and called it a day (deleted the key, reinstalled the OS and never installed Battle.net since then), because:
* I couldn't see, create and join clans or even talk, let alone chat, to people in both, the menu and in game (maybe it's there, but I couldn't find it, and I bet others couldn't find it too), or asking who wants to join/create a party, unlike in D2.
* (will be in next post, ty anti-spam system)
* In D3, monsters would auto-adjust their difficulty and I didn't feel the progress.
* no freedom in which skills I want to put my points in (because AB maybe thinks that normies would be lost?)
* and I'm pretty sure I could think of other negative things
It's like they are atomizing people, just like in real life. I hope D4 has fixed this (obviously, a quick search away to know?). And D5? Looks like they may make it close to D2?, which would fine.

QuoteClasses should define where a character starts. They should not define where that character is allowed to end. If I want a Barbarian who fires ice arrows, let me. If I want a Sorcerer carrying an enormous two-handed axe, let me. If I want a Monk raising undead creatures while punching people, let me.

See character classes like talent in people. Some people will always be better at yielding a sword. Others will be better at calculating a firing solution (are we still talking about Diablo? :-D). This also means allowing where they can end, but D2 had a good balance?.

QuoteGet rid of heavily class-filtered drops. I want my Amazon to find a ridiculous wand. Not because I necessarily need it, but because I might.

See, I didn't even know that it's like this and expected it to be _not_ filtered. Guess I'm not paying the full price for D4 either, if I'm gonna try it.

QuoteI paid for the game. I should be allowed to make bad decisions.

But then it's gonna be like Diablo 2 and normies would have a harder time progressing and BLIZZARD earn less money because of this? What are their shareholders gonna say? Don't forget, the average world IQ is dropping, so ACTIVISION BLIZZARD may not want to make things too complicated (and I hope they don't, because I'm not studying a game and wasting my time/life, I just want fun playing it with other people (as said, inviting people to party, see who's on the map, trading in-game, etc.; in D2 is was nicely done (people should be able to disable any invites, etc., of course))). I may play D4, but before I buy it, I will check how the situation, with inviting and talking to people, etc., is.

QuoteLet me play the campaign offline. Properly offline. No periodic connection. No fake offline mode that still talks to a server. No Battle.net deciding I may not kill demons because my internet disappeared.

Buy what are the share holders gonna way (yes, even for this)?

QuoteI still remember assembling Vex, Hel, El, Eld, Zod and Eth for Breath of the Dying. Finding the Zod was an event.

word (and wort)

QuoteLet bad builds exist. Actual bad builds. One of Path of Exile's greatest strengths can also become one of its biggest traps. It lets you concoct practically anything, but that does not mean the resulting abomination will function.

True, this is way I stopped playing POE..too complicated XD (but I agree letting bad builds exist)

QuoteMake Diablo approachable enough for almost anyone to finish.

Or make it impossible to finish it on your own (not even the main boss), so that you have to talk and coordinate with other people. I guess at least offer such a game mode. Where is the challenge, if one can simply look up a good/best build and finish the game?

QuoteThen make it deep enough that finishing it means absolutely nothing to people who don't want to stop.

Sounds interesting, you may post your ideas and AB may pick up some of them, especially if you also post them on their forum. (tho I may still prefer that finishing the main campaign should require a (real) team effort)

Quote from: AI beginners guide on September 15, 2026, 18:15:30Qwen3.8-Flash-Next (Qwen4 preview) is a 125B parameters LLM model, with only 6B activated per token, plus 51B n-gram embedding and 4B MTP.

Inspired by reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1wgiefk/running_qwen38flashnext_locally_on_a_12gb_vram, I finally decided to make this post to point out the most important thing: llama.cpp runs the 51B n-gram embedding from SSD by default, VRAM and RAM are not used/consumed to store it and the tokens per second performance is unaffected!

I noticed this when I loaded huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-GGUF/tree/main/UD-Q4_K_XL, because my total RAM consumption only increased from 10 GB to 87 GB. If I disable the n-gram embedding offloading to SSD (llama.cpp command: --lazy-mode off), then the RAM consumption increases to 116 GB, but despite running from the much faster RAM now vs SSD by default, the tokens per second speed does not increase (maybe from 18 to 19 t/s?, but it would need more testing to be sure, but obviously not worth further testing, because the additional available 30-35 GB RAM can be used for more important things now, like using a bigger quant or more KV cache context).

(llama-bench seems to ignore --lazy_mode (bug?) and interestingly, is also much slower vs llama-server / llama-cli (8 vs 16-19 t/s). So I can't test the 18 to 19 t/s speed claims more precisely for now (and, as said, it's not important).)

So, if you see e.g. huggingface.co/unsloth/Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-GGUF/tree/main/UD-Q3_K_XL and its 90 GB file size, remember, it's not 90 GB for RAM+VRAM, but 90 GB minus 30-35 GB of the n-gram embedding that runs from SSD.
Btw. the SSD streaming utilization speed, when running UD-Q4_K_XL, is only 5-30 MB/s (using "nvme top" command, which I discovered was introduced in nvme-cli v3.0).

llama.cpp built config (add -j <number_of_threads> to speed up the compilation): cmake -B build -DGGML_CUDA=ON && cmake --build build --config Release
llama.cpp command used:
llama-server -m 'Qwen3.8-Flash-Next-UD-Q4_K_XL-00001-of-00004.gguf' -lm none -np 1 --threads 4 --temp 0.7 --top-k 20 --top-p 0.8 --min-p 0.0 --presence-penalty 1.5 --repeat-penalty 1.0 -c 32768 --reasoning-preserve --reasoning off --reasoning-effort low --lazy-mode on --no-warmup
(Increasing the --threads to 8 doesn't increase the speed, but with MTP, it probably would (just like it does with Qwen3.8-27B) (waiting until llama.cpp/pull/28243 is merged, building didn't work). --lazy-mode on is the default, so not needed to be specified. When --reasoning is set to off, then --reasoning-effort is ignored, but I let it be there, because sometimes I use it. PS: Change llama-server to llama-cli, if you want to use the command line.)

Reading /r/localllama, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next replaced Qwen3.8-27B for some/many. But, when it comes to both, the prompt processing (input) and token generation (output) speeds, nothing beats being able to fully offload a model (quant) into a GPU's much faster VRAM (a Qwen3.8-27B quant in this case).

See how well Qwen3.8-Flash-Next, Qwen3.8-27B and others score on AA Geometry Dash Full:
artificialanalysis.ai/?models=qwen3-5-122b-a10b-non-reasoning%2Cqwen3-5-122b-a10b%2Cmimo-v2-5-0424%2Cnemotron-3-5-lightning%2Cqwen3-6-27b-non-reasoning%2Cminimax-m2-7%2Cmuse-glimmer%2Cnvidia-nemotron-3-super-120b-a12b%2Cqwen3-6-35b-a3b-non-reasoning%2Cstep-3-7-flash%2Cinkling-small%2Csolar-open2-250b%2Cqwen3-6-35b-a3b%2Cqwen3-6-27b%2Cqwen3-8-27b%2Cmotif-3%2Chy3%2Cg9v3-39a5b%2Cgemma-4-31b%2Cgemma-4-31b-non-reasoning%2Cmistral-medium-3-5%2Cling-3-0-flash%2Cgpt-oss-120b%2Cdeepseek-v4-flash%2Cqwen3-8-flash-next%2Cglm-5-3-flash%2Cqwen3-8-27b-medium&intelligence=artificial-analysis-intelligence-index

That n-gram embedding offloading directly to NVMe SSD without a performance penalty is honestly a game changer for mid-spec setups.
 Thanks for saving many of us from needlessly buying extra RAM just to hold static embeddings!

7 Bilder der Kamera aber 0 Bilder des Displays im Freien ist erneut eine total verfehlte Auswahl.

"Höhe x Breite x Tiefe (in mm): 227 x 278.8 x 181.1"

So dick ist kein Tablet. Da muss ein Typo drin sein und auch ein einfaches Dezimalkomma (von NBC falsch als Dezimalpunkt notiert) hälfe nicht.

Da fragt man sich warum das Forum nicht an andere übergeben wurde? Unfassbar so ein vorgehen vom Betreiber.