Honestly, Immortals: Fenyx Rising was superior to Breath of the Wild in every way (for me at least). The world wasn’t “stretched” in size needlessly, “shrines” integrated directly into the overworld, instead of being seperate, the collectibles were sometimes fun (compared to Koroks, which were always bad), there were far more interesting characters and side quests, the world was more alive, the combat was better (if we ignore BotWs weird physics stuff, which has fuckall to do with an action RPG), exploration had an actual point, because you might actually find something nice that doesn’t break five swings in, the story was superior, and the humor was great (to me).
TL;DR: Ubisoft cancels a sequel to their best game in some time, no suprise here.
Yah. I felt exactly the same. I got it on a massive sale for $10 and didn’t think I’d likenit much but I actually liked it more the BOTW. It solved a lot of the problems that BOTW had. I’m bummed they canceled it.
the only thing I‘m missing is a convenient dual boot setup
Microsoft could release a customized Windows installer USB image that handles repartitioning and installs a touch friendly bootloader. Just like they’re not interested in releasing a GamePass client on Flathub, they rather support competitors like the Ally that come with Windows by default.
There's just no way this was ever going to go well, no matter how they clarify. Oh, you can inform Unity of upcoming charity bundles to be exempt from fees? You know what's better than that? Not having a fee for something that stupid. No need to inform anyone of anything.
I give about a year until Unreal does the same, except that they’ll at least have the good graces to waive the fee if games are sold on Epic Contractually Timed Exclusive Games Store.
Looking forward to Godot finally getting the love and recognition it deserves after this, at least.
Yeah, I think it’s pretty likely that the only reason Unreals terms are sustainable at all at this point is that they are funded by vertical integration using Epics infinite Fortnite coffers. Unity has no such safety harness, and has to squeeze everyone for as much money as possible to be profitable. The moment all of Epics deranged fake consumer rights activist PR starts working and devs and customers actually get locked into their ecosystem at scale they will start tightening the screws on everyone.
It’s unfortunate that Ubisoft Quebec will not be able to try and shake things up with an unusual setting and a more challenging game play. From what’s described in the article, it sounded like a welcome iteration over the open-world formula.
With as many Unity games as there are, saying only 10% of developers will end up having to pay is still quite a large number of developers.
Also, I wonder how against the TOS it would be for game devs of existing titles to sandbox Unity behind a firewall and prevent it from accessing the internet. And they say the change applies to old games, do older builds of Unity have the telemetry already? How long has it been in place?
Disappointing. Obviously, there's no way to tell whether the game would have actually been good or not, but stepping away from the Ubisoft formula and taking some inspiration from Elden Ring would have been a step in the right direction.
Yeah, these "clarifications" plainly contradict what they had told journalists before. They already had clarified that they would charge for all installations, not just the initial ones.
I also wonder what Microsoft thinks of this talk that they will be on the hook for Game Pass rather than the developer studio.
axios.com
Ważne