I wish I could play it, but I don’t think my PC could handle it, being right at the edge of minimum specs. Has anyone played it on a 2060? I can live with 1080p and no Ray Tracing but I’m scared of sub-30 FPS.
Forgot to mention I have a gaming laptop. So not equivalent of the 2060 in performance, although it contains the mesh shader support so it won’t literally refuse to run. But seeing as the desktop variant is minimum spec I’m not optimistic.
it is ok on a 2060. the high minimum spec is not because of performance, but because older GPUs do not support mesh shaders. that is why it runs ok on a 2060 while being unplayable on the much faster 1080 Ti
The unionization drive among testers, developers, and others has been one of the few good trends in the gaming industry this year. Hopefully, we'll see more unions form in 2024 and beyond.
Lemme take a guess here: mgmt are going this start complaining that human written articles are dropping off in quality so they will need to focus more on AIGen content.
I like that they experiment around a lot, it probably keeps the work from getting dull for them too with how long they’ve been working on this game. This studio might be my favorite, they’re great with their community and any problems I have with the game’s systems or mechanics (pets, arcanes, under-performing frames, operators, etc.) end up getting fixed. It’s always improving and giving me something to come back to that makes the game feel fresh, even after about a decade of on and off playing!
i have mad respect for them. I play similar stuff like Genshin so my F2P time is all eaten up, but I love that Warframe continues to do whatever the f they want.
M$ monopolizes swathes of the game industry (and several other computer related areas) while Sony monopolizes nearly everything else media related. This is NOT how market competition is supposed to happen.
BTW, Gotcha Gotcha Games is the owner of RPG Maker and Pixel Game Maker, make of that what you will.
These parasites man lmfao unreal. Propping up what industry exactly, their own subgenre of niche writing? Pretty sure the game developers, tech companies, and hardware manufacturers are the ones by far and large carrying the actual gaming economy.
Launchers should do just that, to launch the game. Doing anything other than that is, before anything, a repurposing of the word.
And regarding this specific game, I didn’t see the whole struggle so I don’t even know which game it is, but in case it is officially sold anywhere DRM-free, I strongly suggest going for that, wherever it may be.
This article could’ve been written any decade since the 1990s. It’s nothing new: The big game companies haven’t changed a bit and continue to exploit workers.
The only way to change things is via stronger worker protections/regulations.
Has anyone actually seen anyone actually complain about having politics in games, and not just obnoxious politics, like Specs Ops where they force you to kill civilians and then act like your the bad guy because you wanted to see the content you paid for? If you dont give us a choice to be good, and if you’re super preachy about it, then its just bad writing.
Look at New Vegas, plenty of politics, but you get to make choices, and its not preachy at all. Then look at the Last of Us 2, where they force you to kill a dog the other character petted, and it comes off as blatant emotional manipulation. Which game is widely considered a masterpeice?
Spec Ops actually did have choices where you could be good (or at least less bad), but ironically people missed them because they didn’t think being good would work.
For example, at one point you’re being harassed by an angry mob of locals. A lot of players simply shot them because a lifetime of experience with shooters told them that no other input would be recognized. But in actuality, if you fired warning shots at the ground or over their heads the civilians would flee without incident.
I didnt know that. After the forced willie pete bit, I thought all the other bits were forced too. Specs op unintentionally set a rule “if theres a choice, youll be forced to take the evil one” which made the entire thing feel obnoxious.
I think you’re actually engaging with it a bit shallowly. You are the one who invented the rule and a different framing is exploring how, if games seem to put us in situations where we must do horrible things to advance even a couple of times, we take that as a rule instead of risking losing to find other ways.
Which is a fairly glaring indictment of the whole military shooter genre which is all about “hard men and hard choices” that completely dehumanise the factions you’re in opposition to.
Military shooter games glorify war and shallowly reward horrible behaviour. Spec ops does it differently.
Majority of people: do horrible thing
Some people: experimental and find heroic thing is rewarded.
Discussion possible, why did the majority do that? could we talk about horrible and uncreative design patterns in the genre of military shooters? How media portrayals of war train us not to look for peaceful solutions? Whether this feeds into how we view American imperial wars?
you: no spec ops bad video game because I didn’t do the good option.
People did experiment, in the first scene with the wp. That experiment told them that the game would force you to make evil decisions to continue playing. I saw that narratively there was a good option, but the game told me that that option wasnt available in the WP scene.
you get that this wouldn’t work as a critique if it was obvious you could make different choices right? Then it wouldn’t make the player complicit. If you’re not complicit it’s just a game saying “military shooters could be different” which is a nothing statement.
Like how games with a “get the information (evil)” and “get the information (good)” button aren’t offering real moral choices. Or how deus ex would lose all impact if the “here’s a gun, go kill these people” starting mission tempting you with a rocket launcher popped up a “you might change sides in the future” warning.
By involving you, leading you just like any other military shooter for a bit then cutting you loose is what creates the critique. You compare notes after playing and someone points out something and you go “huh, why didn’t I try that?”. It’s not condemning you for not trying that, it’s asking you if you’re happy with a genre which trains you to never to try it.
If the player doesnt know the choice exists, and has reason to think the choice doesnt exist, then the choice is kinda moot, isnt it? In any case, my original point was a lot of complaints were really about bad writing.
People play games for escapism, not to be reminded of politics. Not every story needs deep political roots, people just want to have fun and forget about real world bullshit.
I stopped following Kotaku years ago. It was the best news site by a large stretch. At some point it quickly became trash in the lapse of a few months.
Regarding the writing guides galore, the same has just happened to Destructoid during this very week, suddenly my feed was flooded with dozens of clickbait “how to de X in [trendy game name]”. I just stopped following them right away.
Now I only have Gemstsu to check news and it is not particularly good, guess sooner than later my only source of new game releases will be the from page of Steam:(
It became trash when they had a site redesign that made it more blog post looking than news site. At the same time, they doubled down on filler articles.
After reading the article, it sounds like they’re at it again with a redesign.
aftermath.site
Ważne