I don’t think it’s just “being 3D”. Mario 64 put a lot of R&D into particulars of how jumping should work, the camera should work, and what the player’s goals should be. Quite a few games unintentionally copied them, while you could see some games not following their lead early in the 3D days that felt very janky to play. Tomb Raider could arguably be among them with the tank controls, though of course it has its own more niche appeal.
Legend of Zelda OoT followed up with popularizing a targeting button (good ol’ Z-targeting) to focus on one object or enemy in a 3D space and move around it or fight/otherwise interact with it. Such targeting has been a standard feature of 3D action-adventure games ever since.
And it’s a bad one if it applies at all. PC shooters of the time always kinda tried, but it didn’t work. The original Half Life got dinged a few points in original reviews because of a few janky platforming sections.
But how did they composite 81,000 images without worrying about atmospheric lensing distorting the proportions as it moved across the sky for 4 days? Is it just negligible?
The Samsung moon actually just makes up a plausible looking moon, which is hilarious given that the moon essentially doesn’t change, so they could have just overlayed reference images. Instead, you get features on the moon that don’t exist.
They didn’t. What they did was take 81,000 images and then filter through, them taking the best images of each region of the Moon and then averaging and compositing those.
It isn’t 81k images stitched together. It’s 81k images taken in the hopes of getting enough with perfect clarity to create the composite.
It was great to watch all these runs on twitch. Now if Nintendo would just release an open source version of the server and all the content people have created…
Nothing changes for you, if you already own them. They’ll still be in your library like before. Visually, the only difference will be that those specific games will have no store page
I’d like a spin-off. Less land stuff and more sea stuff. Instead of the ‘armada’ thing, how about being able to buy or capture larger ships for personal use? Or being able to directly control 2-3 ships? Or fight large scale coordinated naval battles?
That concept has so much more potential and I wish somebody would do more with it.
They’ve been trying with skull and bones but it’s both in development hell, been delayed multiple times and even changed play styles over the years. I’m not hopeful sadly.
And somehow Skull and Bones is coming out this month! Not getting it (cos its Ubisoft) but excited to see how the game will be taken in by the players, if at all…
I played AC:Oddyseey in 2021 and am currently playing through AC4:BF now for the first time. I’ve been wondering if the Ody ship mechanic was as great as I remember of if it was just a nostalgic feeling having it for the first time in the tail of Origins and throughout Odyssey. Sounds like it was actually great. Not-true-to-AC argument aside, Ody was an excellent game as someone who started on Unity.
I do recommend AC4: Black Flag as a pirate game. It does take a fair amount of somewhat normal AC gameplay (and Ubisoft side quest trinket distractions) to get enough upgrades to the ship to feel like a real pirate of the Caribbean and not just a poop deck swabber, but my ship is nearly maxed at ~75% story completion. I make sure my wanted level stays maxed so the pirate hunters chase me in level 60 men’o’war every time it loads me at sea. Two types of side cannons, forward chain cannons, rear fire barrel mines, long range mortars, front ram, and the option to board disabled ships for swashbuckler combat to gain different rewards. Plus a little tabletop smuggling across the Atlantic with turn-based sprite battles for a laughably insignificant amount of money compared to the work it takes to capture proficient ships.
Why even waste your time making this post if you don’t actually want anyone to debate you? In your post, and in a couple comments, you say you can’t/won’t be dissuaded from your opinion; so literally why waste your energy making this post (or any of your other bullshit ones, for that matter)?
I actually got my answer. Apparently, there really are elements in the game that would have been valid, if they were in an actual game, instead of a money-sucking, immoral racketeering enterprise.
I wanted to know if that was the case, or if it was just about anime perverts getting off on anime tiddys.
Ain’t no “whatever” about it, my dude. Have I not explained my reasons enough for you to have a basic understanding of them?
And I literally was curious. I was wondering if this game had any nuggets of actual unique (wasted) potential, or if it’s just particularly successful at playing the psychological trickery of: ANIME TITS --> SLOT MACHINE ELEMENTS --> MORE ANIME TITS --> A TINY SLICE OF GAMELIKE ACTIVITY --> MORE TITS --> MORE GAMBLING --> MORE TITS, etc.
Hey, I didn’t mean to make it exclusively about anime titties. There are completely non-anime-related games that use exploitative gacha mechanics.
I’m referring to games that exploit gambling addicts. Do you understand that situation? The harm that is being caused by games openly exploiting people who can’t control themselves?
It’s exactly the same as serving alcohol to an alcoholic. If you do that shit, you’re an asshole.
And gacha games are even worse than actual casinos, for two reasons:
First, because they don’t involve the players winning money, the racketeers aren’t even putting any of their own cash at risk. Even with the house advantage, there’s always SOME chance that a real casino will lose money, every time someone pulls a slot machine lever. Gacha games, though, they don’t lose any money when you win a character, or a skin, or a weapon, or some fake gold pieces.
Secondly, because there’s no real money being won, gacha games evade existing laws against gambling. People are free to LOSE their money, all the way to zero, but they can’t win a cent, so it’s all nice and legal.
That shit is fucked up. Gacha games are built on savage exploitation. I’ll hasten to add that not all F2P games are based on the most awful version of this metric. Some games don’t encourage the gambling mentality nearly as much, and I should have given them credit, sooner. If you’re just able to buy skins or gold or whatever, it’s not as bad. As long as the game doesn’t come back in some other direction and get you by limiting your ability to play the game with artificial “stamina” mechanics, or whatever else, and pry exploitative amounts of money out of you, that way.
Cue the BUT STEAMS MONOPOLY idiots that completely ignore that Valve does nothing to stop anyone from competing with them, its just that anyone who has tried (outside GOG) has only produced anti consumer garbage
People who understand nuance exists in this world. Steams DRM is a VERY RARE check to the internet that you own the game, and its an OPTIONAL thing that developers can choose. EA UBI and EPIC’s versions of DRM is FAR WORSE, and if you really want to be extreme in your hatred of even reasonable level DRM, GOG exists
Steams DRM is a VERY REASONABLE compromise between the interests of the devs and the consumer not wanting to be unfairly punished/annoyed. Steams DRM has literally NEVER caused me a headache aside from ONCE when steam was super new, its a non issue at this point
Yeah, and when I show up to work, regardless of how much I like what I do or my coworkers, I expect to be paid for it, your point is? They created a form of DRM that is the least obtrusive out there, made it optional, and they gave us one of the best store fronts out there as compensation for it. Again, Ubi, EA, and Epic’s DRM is FAR WORSE.
It’s definitely convenient to have everything in once place, and Steam has way more features, but it’s good to avoid Steam becoming too monopolistic. We saw recently how badly that can go with reddit.
Despite the widespread worshipping of Steam and GabeN, I’ve had lots of issues with Steam and Valve over the years.
No, Steam gained its near monopoly through anti-consumer practices as well: being mandatory for playing Valve games, even offline, as soon as 2004; being DRM-ridden; locking consumers out of their right to sell their games on second-hand market; still enforcing an old revenue share system that’s hurting devs; or putting micro-transactions everywhere with their collectible system that you can’t really disable at all. Just to name a few.
Steam is not better than others. You’re just used to its flaws.
The only one that goes on Epic’s favor is the cut, but frankly I think the whole “old revenue share system that’s hurting devs” is nothing more than Epic’s propaganda trying to get marketshare. 70/30 in favor of the devs while Steam handles hosting, community platform, multiplayer and modding tools, so forth, is neither unusual nor ripping anyone off, certainly not worth how maligned it was. I understand devs who prefer Epic’s cut, but I don’t think Epic is doing this out of fairness, nor that it can be relied on if they ever do gain ground.
In the other aspects, it’s either equal or worse. It has as much DRM. Steam provides options for people to trade extra copies they didn’t activate but as far as I know other stores don’t. Neither allows people to trade away activated copies so that’s no points for anyone.
I assume the microtransaction thing is talking about Steam Trading Cards and such, they are a bit of an iffy worthless addition to get people to waste money… but if the person is concerned over how much money the devs are getting, they do get a cut from every transaction, so under that perspective it should be counted as a plus. Which, by the way, is entirely up to the dev to add or not.
I don’t really remember asking for your opinion on what a fair cut should be or what you think is a rip off. But the fact is that Steam takes more money from developers than other powerful competitors around (but 30% is barely enough to get servers running if I listen to you :D ). Okay. Sure. Yes. Right.
The microtransactions are so awful in Steam that with proposed laws in some countries (like the Netherlands) it would make the whole thing illegal. Some of the worst Valve practices already are, like the loot boxes (they’re banned there).
I don’t tell you that you should switch to something else than Steam. I don’t tell you that there’s a better choice (maybe GOG?). But what I’m saying is that Steam is indeed predatory and has been known for its anti-consumer practices, despite what some True Gamers™ seem to believe.
I don’t really remember asking for your opinion on what a fair cut should be or what you think is a rip off.
Too bad, this is a public forum. I don’t need to ask for your permission to say whatever I want. But if that’s how you are going to go about it, then feel free to think whatever you want on your corner.
Yeah, Steam has DRM. Its the least annoying DRM that exists entirely because they gave us one of the best shop fronts that exists on PC as a trade off. And all companies have the right to sell their own games on whichever store they wish. Unlike Epic, Steam doesnt buy the exclusive rights to OTHER companies games, its just their own games. Your imaginary competition utopian dreamland doesnt exist, and you’re turning optional mole hills into mountains in order to pretend the best option we have is bad. If you don’t like collectible trading cards and the least annoying DRM ever created, go buy on GOG, EPIC UBI and EA all have FAR WORSE practices
Avoid it in favor of GoG. Ubisoft can’t be trusted with a single drop of goodwill. As we can see by how they inject their clunky garbage manager even in games they sell through other stores.
I think this is by far the worst generation for gaming.
Obviously from a technical standpoint, it’s great. Fast loading times, better performance, graphical prowess. But in terms of the quality of the games, it’s dire. I honestly don’t understand why I was in such a rush to buy a PS5, because most of the games I’ve enjoyed have had PS4 versions, so whilst I may have experienced that better performance and graphics etc, I didn’t really need to buy a PS5.
I didn’t need to buy my PS5 either, but my PS4 was a much older device I’d bought cheap from a co-worker and I felt like it was getting slow.
The bonus of having both is that the PS4 is comparatively light and compact, so I can travel with it, and for the two PS5 exclusives I have, there is an option to remote play the PS5 on the PS4, so I’m generally happy with my purchase.
All that notwithstanding, I’ve got an Xbox One X and I’ve seen no real need to upgrade that to a Series X. There are no Xbox exclusives for the Series X/S that have been driving forces.
This generation honestly feels like it lacks direction. The consoles are more expensive and are huge devices, with controllers that now cost more than games. With the original scarcity of the newer consoles, nearly four years into this generation, new releases are still available for the older gen. I feel like we’re reaching a point where console evolution either needs to take an enormous leap, or we just stop seeing console generations altogether.
Pokémon. You get to choose from Charmander, Bulbasaur, and Squirtle for your starter. And everyone you know will judge you for which starter you picked.
Idk, on Android you can run Pojav Launcher, but I don’t really know much about x boxes. Probably a mistake to buy such a closed ecosystem in the first place, from the little I have heard.
At ten I was coding basic stuff and figuring out lan networks to play multiplayer games in the early 90’s. An average 10 year old is very capable of figuring out tech stuff.
Eh… Like I said, I was doing a bit more just to play with friends. I guess these days it would depend. If you did the install and introduced it as the method for launching the game I don’t think they’d even question it.
Almost definitely. When they did the initial release, it could have easily been a flop, and if it was a flop, it would have been pointless to have gone in planning to repair and sell refurbished units. Now that sales are showing its a hit, they are taking the time to invest in changes for more long-term support.
Self-tapping screws made sense for a product in an entirely new product category without knowledge if it would be successful or not. Torx screws that slide into metal threads makes a lot more sense for what is expected to be a product with long shelf-life.
The only thing is, the refurb market can’t be that great to pay for this change. You might not think it, but changing to better screws and adding the metal threads is crazy more expensive.
Crazy more expensive for raw profits - per unit, it’s basically negligible.
You could say this if s consumer focused effort to achieve market share or sell more games, but I choose to believe this if just what happens
Personally, I think this is just what happens when you have an employee run tech company. They lose out on like 0.05% profits, but more then make up for it through game sales and reputation
I mean realistically, this is probably a few cents a unit. Across hen million units, that’s real money. But quality pays over time. They lose out on quarterly profits, but they don’t worry about that bs - they’re not publicly traded, and they’ll make way more on a 5 year timespan
Fair point, although I’d argue that this is probably a cheap and standard extra step
Molds and turn around time are definitely expensive… But much cheaper if you wait until the next version that probably will have different mount points for the newer internals
I’m not saying this isn’t worth praising, I’m just saying this is exactly what integrity and giving your employees autonomy looks like. You come back for version 2, and you take your lessons learned, you explore the improvements that you thought up during the last version
It’s just basic craftsmanship, but that has unfortunately been smothered in most places these days. You have to be big enough for this to be an R&D effort you can afford to fail, but small enough no one has bought you up to wring you for value
That and they want as many Steam decks to be working as possible. They don’t make their money on Steam Deck’s as much as they make money on people buying games for them.
Yes! I almost always change a few of the buttons when I get the chance. Extra points if the game is nice enough to let you know when your changes conflict with other presets.
A lot of PC games let you change mouse and keyboard bindings, but not controller bindings, because they have “keyboard and mouse mode” or “console mode” if the controller is used.
I’ve got no problem with having a sensible set of defaults, but if I get a controller with more buttons, unless this is a competitive multiplayer game that needs a level playing field, I’d like to be able to take advantage of them.
Yeah, but if that’s the only way a game developer implements it, they’re tying themselves to Steam. I mean, if I were a game developer, I wouldn’t want to do that, as it’s a lot of lock-in.
I think that Valve’s service is a pretty good one, but they’re taking a 30% cut for doing a number of things for game developers. If they become the only game in town, it’s possible that they might start taking more than 30% and those developers are going to be kind of stuck with that.
It’s common across games, so it doesn’t make sense for game devs to reimplement the wheel, but I’d think that putting as much as possible in the game engine would be a reasonable place.
Not being able to bind the controller on PC is even more insane to me. Why can I change my entire keyboard layout but not change the controller AT ALL?
I get that you‘re frustrated for more reasons than a freshly released game has bugs but this is literally the first time I hear of bg 3 being not completeable. What specs are you running on?
bin.pol.social
Ważne