Kalakshar US

Blizzard has provided an update that will be music to the ears of many Overwatch 2 fans. The publisher plans to experiment with a range of team compositions beyond the role-locked 5v5 format that the game currently has. That includes a potential revival of six-player teams from the original Overwatch.

“The community has, juuuust once or twice, suggested a test,” Overwatch 2 game director Aaron Keller wrote in a blog post. “Why not put various forms of 6v6 in the game in order to gauge the results? We agree, and based on your feedback, we’re exploring how we can test different forms of 6v6 in the game to gauge the results.”

Keller is quick to point out that it may take some time before the team runs a 6v6 trial. Overwatch 2 was designed from the ground up for five-player teams, with hero balancing and map designs (and redesigns) taking into account the reduced damage mitigation from having one fewer tank on each side.

There are technical considerations here too, as features such as visual upgrades, more technically demanding hero kits and the ability to see outlines of allies through walls impact Overwatch 2′s performance. As such, shifting from 10-player to 12-player lobbies could have a negative impact on performance, particularly on older or less-powerful systems.

“Overwatch is a fast-paced game, and maintaining a game that runs smoothly across all our platforms is important for the player’s experience,” Keller wrote. “While a limited-time test could arrive sooner, the team is still investigating exactly how long it would take to permanently increase performance across the game. This would be a large effort that would most likely take at least several seasons to accomplish.”

The possibility of lengthier queue times is also a concern if 6v6 tests are a success and the format sticks around in some way for the long haul. Keller’s blog post is a lengthy read, but well worth taking the time to check out if you’re interested in how we ended up at 5v5 with players locked to specific roles in the core modes. One of the reasons why Blizzard ditched a tank from each team with the launch of Overwatch 2 two years ago was that it was the least popular of the three roles, with damage in first place and support in between. Having one fewer tank has helped to reduce queue times across the board.

Keller notes that his team does have some ideas about how to tackle potentially longer queue times if 6v6 returns for the long haul, but it wasn’t a problem that was solved in the past and it’s not a sure thing that the fresh strategies will work. “Is there a world where people are willing to live with long queue times to play this format? Maybe, but that’s a pretty risky move to make,” Keller wrote. “We also have tens of millions of new players that have only played 5v5. We want to be openly mindful not to frustrate those who like the game as it is today.”

There are other reasons why Blizzard changed to a 5v5 format including that it wasn’t necessarily fun to play against a team that used two shield-based tanks. Chokepoints could feel oppressive with two tanks blocking the path. Dropping one of them and placing more of an emphasis on things like flanking, individual impact and a little thing called first-person shooting (with more opportunities to actually shoot at opponents instead of barriers) was designed to make gameplay more fluid and fun. Team fights with multiple tanks on each side also were often a war of attrition until ultimate abilities became available, especially during the infamous GOATS meta.

Still, many fans spent years playing the game in groups of six, and having to lose one of those from the gang with the shift to 5v5 sucked for a lot of people. Plus, the synergy of two tanks could make for really fun moments — the Earthshatter/D.Va Bomb combo was always a personal favorite. Given that Blizzard has always prided itself on taking player feedback into account and fostering the concept of building Overwatch 2 together with the fans, it’s great to see that the team is willing to at least test how 6v6 could work in the modern landscape.

However, 6v6 isn’t the only alternate approach to the current team composition that Blizzard plans to try. “Besides running experiments with 6v6, we’d like to run some that re-examine the ways we tried solving previous problems, specifically with the goal of bringing some of the freedom back to an Overwatch match without the severity of issues that accompanied it,” Keller wrote. “For instance, we think there could be other ways of putting a team together that aren’t quite as rigid as a set composition, but not as loose as Open Queue.” Blizzard will try at least one version of this idea in an experimental Quick Play mode during Season 13, which will take place this fall.

Any permanent changes to the current format, whether or not that means a shift back to 6v6, won’t happen overnight. Blizzard would run any 6v6 tests for a few weeks at a time to gauge feedback from players, and then see how that format impacts the game beyond core gameplay, such as in arcade modes. 

“We’d take the lessons from this playtest to see what we can learn about the mode within the current game ecosystem and for the future of Overwatch,” Keller wrote. “We would reflect carefully on the learnings from whatever test we run and explore how to best give players what’s being asked for. Whether that’s a world of 5v5, 6v6 or even both, is for future us to figure out.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/overwatch-2-may-test-a-return-to-six-player-teams-180021753.html?src=rss 

AI company Runway reportedly scraped “thousands” of YouTube videos and pirated versions of copyrighted movies without permission. 404 Media obtained alleged internal spreadsheets suggesting the AI video-generating startup trained its Gen-3 model using YouTube content from channels like Disney, Netflix, Pixar and popular media outlets.

An alleged former Runway employee told the publication the company used the spreadsheet to flag lists of videos it wanted in its database. It would then download them without detection using open-source proxy software to cover its tracks. One sheet lists simple keywords like astronaut, fairy and rainbow, with footnotes indicating whether the company had found corresponding high-quality videos to train on. For example, the term “superhero” includes a note reading, “Lots of movie clips.” (Indeed.)

Other notes show Runway flagged YouTube channels for Unreal Engine, filmmaker Josh Neuman and a Call of Duty fan page as good sources for “high movement” training videos.

“The channels in that spreadsheet were a company-wide effort to find good quality videos to build the model with,” the former employee told 404 Media. “This was then used as input to a massive web crawler which downloaded all the videos from all those channels, using proxies to avoid getting blocked by Google.”

A list of nearly 4,000 YouTube channels, compiled in one of the spreadsheets, flagged “recommended channels” from CBS New York, AMC Theaters, Pixar, Disney Plus, Disney CD and the Monterey Bay Aquarium. (Because no AI model is complete without otters.)

In addition, Runway reportedly compiled a separate list of videos from piracy sites. A spreadsheet titled “Non-YouTube Source” includes 14 links to sources like an unauthorized online archive of Studio Ghibli films, anime and movie piracy sites, a fan site displaying Xbox game videos and the animated streaming site kisscartoon.sh.

In what could be viewed as a damning confirmation that the company used the training data, 404 Media found that prompting the video generator with the names of popular YouTubers listed in the spreadsheet spit out results bearing an uncanny resemblance. Crucially, entering the same names in Runway’s older Gen-2 model — trained before the alleged data in the spreadsheets — generated “unrelated” results like generic men in suits. Additionally, after the publication contacted Runway asking about the YouTubers’ likenesses appearing in results, the AI tool stopped generating them altogether.

“I hope that by sharing this information, people will have a better understanding of the scale of these companies and what they’re doing to make ‘cool’ videos,” the former employee told 404 Media.

When contacted for comment, a YouTube representative pointed Engadget to an interview its CEO Neal Mohan gave to Bloomberg in April. In that interview, Mohan described training on its videos as a “clear violation” of its terms. “Our previous comments on this still stand,” YouTube spokesperson Jack Mason wrote to Engadget.

Runway did not respond to a request for commeInt by the time of publication.

At least some AI companies appear to be in a race to normalize their tools and establish market leadership before users — and courts — catch onto how their sausage was made. Training with permission through licensed deals is one thing, and that’s another tactic companies like OpenAI have recently adopted. But it’s a much sketchier (if not illegal) proposition to treat the entire internet — copyrighted material and all — as up for grabs in a breakneck race for profit and dominance.

404 Media’s excellent reporting is worth a read.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai-video-startup-runway-reportedly-trained-on-thousands-of-youtube-videos-without-permission-182314160.html?src=rss 

There’s no way around it: Samsung copied Apple in multiple ways on its Galaxy Buds 3 ($180) and Galaxy Buds 3 Pro ($250). Not only do the physical designs echo the third-gen AirPods and AirPods Pro, respectively, but Samsung also mirrored a few features, too. The Galaxy Buds offer Adaptive Active Noise Cancellation (ANC), Adaptive EQ and Voice Detect, which just happen to do the same thing as Apple’s Adaptive Audio and Conversation Awareness. And just like Apple does with AirPods and iOS, the best features here are reserved for recent Samsung devices. If you have a newer Galaxy phone, that’s the saving grace of these earbuds: They’re the de facto AirPods you’ve probably always wanted.

Galaxy Buds 3 and Galaxy Buds 3 Pro design

The Galaxy Buds 3 are the most obvious AirPods copycat of the pair, sharing a striking resemblance to the third-generation “regular” model that Apple debuted in 2021. The shape and location of the speaker and other components are but two examples of the replication on display here. Samsung’s “blade” design for the stem does offer some variation, but not a ton, and there’s a gray option for more contrast. On the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro, there’s a lot of resemblance to the AirPods Pro. Once more, the angular nature of the stem and the gray color are the two biggest differentiators.

Samsung’s “blade” stem accepts both swipes to adjust volume and pinches for playback and noise controls. While the sliding action works well, the pinching takes some getting used to. My tendency is to place my index finger on the flat panel opposite the back side where you pinch, but that doesn’t provide enough pressure to activate the controls. Instead, you have to wrap your finger around the blade to hold it in place. Once you figure out how to grip them securely, pressing on them is a much easier task.

The case for both Galaxy Buds 3 models has a similar shape to that of the AirPods, but Samsung’s choice to go with a clear lid creates some separation, and I liked being able to see if the buds were inside without having to open it. Samsung also put the USB-C port and the Bluetooth pairing button on the bottom where Apple puts the latter component on the back of the case.

The Galaxy Buds 3 Pro vs. Apple’s AirPods Pro.

One weird thing about the case is how the earbuds sit in it. When you take the Galaxy Buds 3 out of your ears, you have to rotate them 180 degrees to put them in the case. This doesn’t sound like a huge inconvenience until you have to do it a few times a day. Samsung did this to make the Blade Lights visible when the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro are in the case, which, to me, doesn’t justify the annoyance.

Speaking of the Blade Lights, let’s discuss that design choice. They’re completely unnecessary. As the user, you only see them when the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro are in the case. In that position, they function as a second indicator that the earbuds are in pairing mode, which isn’t needed because the case already has its own LED for purpose on the front. You can set them to stay on when you’re wearing them, or either fade in/out or blink, but I’m not personally into drawing more attention to my earbuds.

Both sets in the Galaxy Buds 3 series are IP57 rated so they’ll withstand sweaty workouts with no problems. However, the Pro version is the better option for activities as the ear tip helps keep them in place when moisture comes into play. What’s more, I didn’t encounter any discomfort with either Galaxy Buds 3 model when wearing them for hours at a time. They both remained comfortable and I never felt like I was enduring some degree of pain to keep them in.

Samsung is also dealing with some quality control issues on the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro. It’s nothing to do with functionality, but the company paused shipments due to overly fragile ear tips. This component has a tendency to tear when you remove them from the earbuds, which is a problem if you need to go back to a pair of tips you were using previously. Since the Galaxy Buds 3 don’t use these, they’re not affected. I’ve asked Samsung for an update on the ear tip saga and will update this review when there’s more info.

Notable features

Besides design, Samsung also took a page from Apple when it comes to features on the Galaxy Buds 3 series. First, both models have Adaptive EQ and Adaptive ANC — two key tools on AirPods. These features constantly monitor sound and adjust both the tuning and the noise cancellation based on what you encounter. They mostly run in the background and the only time you might notice a change is when music or a podcast suddenly seems slightly louder because of the earbuds doing their thing.

Samsung went a step further on the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro with some more advanced features. Adaptive Noise Control automatically adjusts a mix of ANC and ambient sound based on your surroundings while Voice Detect will lower the volume and activate transparency mode when you start speaking. As noted above, these are basically Samsung’s take on Apple’s Adaptive Audio and Conversation Awareness features, respectively. There’s also a Siren Detect that does the same auto volume reduction and ambient sound thing when it hears an emergency vehicle.

All of these work as described, but I would like the volume reduction and activating ambient sound to happen simultaneously. Instead, the volume lowers and then a couple seconds later transparency mode kicks in. So, once you start talking, you might feel the need to speak louder until you can hear yourself better when the full capability of Voice Detect kicks in. Additionally, I’m happy to report that Voice Detect isn’t easily triggered by coughing like comparable features on other earbuds tend to be. The Galaxy Buds 3 series voice features also accommodate simple commands without pressing any buttons or muttering a trigger word. You can just say things like “play music,” “volume up” or “answer call” for basic tasks. These work well once you memorize the accepted phrases, like the fact that “stop music” works but not “pause music.” 

The Galaxy Buds 3 series also has a Real-Time Interpreter akin to what Google offers on its Pixel Buds. In Samsung’s case, the feature can read and translate other languages. When the tool is active, you can pinch and hold the stem and the setup with continue to interpret while someone is talking. The downside is this whole thing currently requires a Galaxy Z Fold 6 or Flip 6 as those are the only phones running One UI 6.1.1. Due to this, I wasn’t able to test it as my companion device is an S24 Ultra. 

Galaxy Buds 3 and Galaxy Buds 3 Pro sound quality

The Galaxy Buds 3 offer solid audio performance, mainly due to a pleasant amount of low-end tone. The bass tuning here provides a nice backbone to songs and keeps pace with the punchy highs and full mids. That said, how the Galaxy Buds 3 sit in my ears affects overall sound quality. I could make them sound a little better with a small positioning adjustment, but that’s not how they’d rest on their own.

If sound quality is your primary concern though, the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro is the better option. Samsung’s choice to use two-way speakers and dual amplifiers creates deep sound that’s immersive and detailed. You’ll get the best performance from a recent Samsung phone where you can employ Ultra High Quality (UHQ) audio and 24-bit HiFi. The higher-resolution streaming is also available on the Galaxy Buds 3, but it’s better suited to the Pro model. Both models also offer 360 Audio with direct multi-channel support. However, I don’t think that particular mode sounds good on either set of earbuds. The audio is thin and favors treble, making it less balanced, zapping the oomph out of the excellent bass tone.

When you deploy the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro at their maximum potential with lossless audio, you get robust, enveloping sound that rivals some of the best earbuds I’ve tested. I still prefer the tuning of the Sennheiser Momentum True Wireless 4 to these, but Samsung has really flexed its muscle here. There’s beefy bass when a track like Balance and Composure’s “Cross To Bear” demands it, but the echo-y guitars and vocals cut through cleanly. Plus, there’s ample fine detail in the texture of the bass line and the crisp drum sounds.

Active noise cancellation performance

The Galaxy Buds 3 have ANC even though they are open-type earbuds that don’t completely seal off your ears. Samsung has done this before on previous models and I still don’t understand why. The ANC on this model is more like slight noise reduction as it barely makes a difference with any background ruckus you might encounter. I’m guessing Samsung read the reports about Apple bringing ANC to an upcoming version of its “regular” AirPods and felt like it needed to beat Apple to the punch. Either way, if you want true, helpful noise-canceling earbuds, the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro are the better option here.

You won’t find ANC performance that rivals Bose and Sony on the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro, but the noise-blocking ability is good enough to combat a low-to-moderate constant roar. The earbuds struggle mightily with human voices, which is a stumbling block for a lot of the competition. I will point out that transparency mode works really well, providing a natural option for ambient sound that almost rises to the level of the AirPods Pro. I think Apple still has the upper hand there, but Samsung has done well to give us something that makes calls easier and doesn’t make environmental noise sound overly muted when you actually want to hear it.

Call quality

The quality of transparency mode on the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro makes them a great option for hands-free calls. You can chat without feeling like you need to shout to hear yourself. The open nature of the Galaxy Buds 3 also makes them a solid choice for voice and video for you, the user. For the person on the other end, you’ll sound slightly better than if you were on speakerphone on both sets, which is about average for earbuds these days. It isn’t pristine, but it gets the job done in most circumstances.

Battery life on the Galaxy Buds 3 and Galaxy Buds 3 Pro

Both the Galaxy Buds 3 and the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro had no trouble hitting Samsung’s stated battery figures during my tests. That’s five hours for the former and six hours for the latter, and I tested them with ANC on and the volume between 50 and 75 percent. Each model gets around 20 additional hours of noise-canceling use from the case. The cases for both models support wireless charging, but Samsung doesn’t mention any expected times for full charging from zero or any quick-charge features that might be available. I’ve asked the company for more details here and I’ll update this review if there’s more to share.

The competition

Despite all of the comparisons to AirPods that Samsung has heaped upon itself, Apple’s earbuds aren’t the main competition for the Galaxy Buds 3 and Galaxy Buds 3 Pro. That’s because Apple headphones aren’t good choices for Android users because the company reserves the best features for iPhone, iPad and Mac. Samsung used to cater to iOS users, but it took the same walled garden approach of its rival. Galaxy Buds will work with your iPhone, but without all the bells and whistles.

Instead, Sony’s WF-1000XM5 is the best alternative to the Galaxy Buds 3 Pro. Android and iOS users both get access to the most attractive features, which include Speak-to-Chat voice recognition, DSEE Extreme audio upscaling and automatic settings adjustments based on either activity or location. iPhone users only miss out on head tracking. The 1000XM5 is more comfortable than its predecessor thanks to a smaller overall design and battery life is longer than both Samsung and Apple at eight hours with ANC on.

Wrap-up

I’ll be honest, when Samsung revealed two sets of earbuds that bear resemblance to two models of AirPods, I wasn’t expecting much in terms of performance. However, the company certainly surprised me. Audio quality is great on both sets of Galaxy Buds 3, though the Pro model nears spectacular in its sonic capabilities. Samsung could use some more polish on its features like Voice Detect, but the company clearly sees the value in giving its Galaxy phone customers an analogous experience to what iPhone users get with AirPods. Ultimately, though, the company’s previous earbuds were good on their own merits. Samsung would be better served by making the next version of Galaxy Buds stand out because of their own unique features, rather than just aping the AirPods across the board.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/samsung-galaxy-buds-3-and-galaxy-buds-3-pro-review-airpods-clones-that-actually-deliver-171024116.html?src=rss